You just knew that one of either Tony Romo or Jay Cutler was going to have a sub-zero passer rating game on Monday night, right? It was preordained with a prime time game featuring the two erratic quarterbacks. Fortunately for the Bears, Bad Romo showed up that even more gloriously led to a nostalgic appearance by the Neckbeard. Let’s get onto some other news:

(1) Beastly Big East Expansion – I didn’t get to write about this at all last week, but the Big East reportedly has been looking at BYU and Air Force for its 14th football member (and might even add those 2 plus Army to have a 16-team football league). If the Big East can pull off that trifecta, that’s effectively the best that the conference could realistically do considering the circumstances. However, I continue to have doubts about the viability of a BYU candidacy for the Big East because of that school’s very different leadership structure and goals compared to any other FBS school. Indeed, Brett McMurphy, in his report linked above, said, “BYU was close to joining the Big East last November, until the deal blew up essentially at the last minute when the Cougars refused to relinquish their home television rights.” That’s such a basic fundamental issue that I find it difficult to believe that it could have possibly only been brought up at the last minute unless a group far above the athletic director’s pay grade (AKA the actual leadership of the LDS Church) purposefully lobbed in a grenade to tank the negotiations. My understanding from BYU people has always been that TV exposure trumps TV money by a wide margin to LDS leadership, which means that they aren’t going to be persuaded by merely a larger check from a share of Big East TV rights versus the guaranteed widespread exposure that the school receives now in its ESPN contract. Plus, BYU has effectively stated previously that Comcast’s dealings with the Mountain West were the biggest reason why the school turned independent in the first place, so it will be an extremely tough sell for the Big East to pitch the value of any potential NBC/Comcast deal to the Cougars no matter how much it might pay. The Big East’s largest selling point to BYU would be that the access to the new 7th top tier bowl discussed here last week may only be open to the champions of the “Gang of Five” conferences (the Big East, Mountain West, Conference USA, Sun Belt and MAC), which means that the school’s ability to make it into the new BCS (or whatever it will be called) system will solely be via a handful of access bowl slots determined by a selection committee. Essentially, Big East commissioner Mike Aresco has to convince the LDS Church (NOT the BYU athletic department, which seems to be much more open to conference membership) that the exposure gained from having access to this new 7th bowl trumps the week-to-week exposure that the school is receiving from its current TV deals. I think the chances of BYU joining the Big East are better than they were two weeks ago, but still nowhere near a foregone conclusion. Hence, the hedging comment in the McMurphy piece that the Big East is “divided over whether to pursue Air Force or BYU.” It’s very clear that BYU is the superior option, but the Big East needs to make it look like that it chose Air Force (instead of getting rejected by BYU) if it ends up adding the Falcons. (“You didn’t reject us! We rejected you!”)

As you can see, I believe that Air Force is a much more realistic addition to the Big East compared to BYU. Things have changed greatly for Air Force since it rejected the Big East’s overtures 1 year ago, particularly the fact that the Big East decided to raid Air Force’s home of the Mountain West of Boise State and San Diego State. Navy has also committed to join the Big East for football since that time, so that gives the Air Force a service academy rival to potentially enter the league with. In contrast, nothing has really changed for BYU other than potentially the bowl situation. As a result, if I were a betting man, Air Force is going to end up as Big East football school #14.

On another note, Big East Coast Bias points out that the new Atlantic 10 TV contract shows why the Catholic members of the Big East aren’t going to be splitting off to create a CYO basketball league. In this era of skyrocketing sports rights contracts, the Atlantic 10 is going to be receiving $40 million over the course of 8 years. That translates into $5 million per year to be split among 14 members, which amounts to an average of a little more than $350,000 per year per school. This has to be a scary figure for the schools that solely depend upon basketball revenue. Granted, I believe that a CYO basketball league made up of the current Big East Catholic schools plus a handful of others (e.g. St. Louis University, Xavier, Dayton) would command a better TV contract than what the Atlantic 10 is receiving, but this new deal effectively ensures that those Big East members won’t even take the chance of a split. As I noted last year, splitting up the Big East would be as misguided as the maligned and eventually overturned decision to split up Netflix and this is more evidence of that being the case.

(2) DePaul Arena Dreaming – Speaking of the Big East and on a more personal note, the notion of DePaul basketball returning to the Chicago city limits is finally gaining steam. DePaul is looking at either moving home games to the United Center or partnering with the city and Mayor Rahm Emanuel to build a new arena near McCormick Place. I have been arguing that DePaul basketball ought to move to the United Center at a minimum ever since I started this blog (see this post about DePaul’s very first Big East game, which happened to be against Notre Dame, complete with an outdated reference to the now-defunct Demon Dogs), so it’s been a long time coming. Personally, I like the McCormick Place proposal even more since the funding appears to be available, Rahm seems to want to get it done (meaning that it’s much more than a pipe dream) and it would be an arena whose primary tenant is DePaul (compared to the United Center, where the order of precedence is (1) Ringling Bros. Circus, (2) Disney on Ice, (3) Bulls, (4) Blackhawks and (5) everything else). A new CTA Green Line Station at Cermak Road to serve McCormick Place is being built, which means that even though the arena isn’t necessarily close to Lincoln Park, it would be easily accessible by public transportation for students on the North Side and even easier for people based at DePaul’s expanding South Loop campus. There is also plenty of parking structures already in place for people that want to drive. It’s not as desirable as having a Lincoln Park location, but considering the practical issues of cost and transportation, this is the most viable option for a DePaul arena within the city limits that we have ever seen.

Also, I can see Rahm’s reasoning for pushing this plan from an urban planning perspective. As someone that lived in Chinatown for a time (which is one mile directly west of McCormick Place straight down Cermak Road), there’s definitely a major gap in commercial development (or at least conventioneer/tourist-friendly commercial development) in the blocks between the Chinatown Red Line station and the convention center complex. Considering that McCormick Place is arguably the largest single draw for business visitors to Chicago (who have expense accounts to spend), there is decidedly very little in the way of restaurants and bars in that area. A new arena can be a catalyst for more development in a spot that definitely needs it along with connecting the McCormick Place area to the more developed Chinatown to the west and the rest of the South Loop that is already gentrified to the north. Granted, there have been plenty of DePaul arena options that have fallen through over the years, so we’ll proceed with cautious optimism here.

My main disagreements with the overall poll is that I believe that LSU, Notre Dame (out of all teams) and Northwestern are underrated, while the winner of the Georgia-South Carolina game this weekend is going to end up overrated. Also, I will continue to bring the love for Louisiana Tech as long as they keep winning. That’s a legit BCS buster.

(4) College Football Parlay Picks (odds from Yahoo! and home teams in CAPS)

WISCONSIN (-14) over Illinois – I’m counting down the days to basketball season at this point. It’s getting ugly for the Illini.

Miami (+14) over Notre Dame (game at Soldier Field in Chicago) – Despite my belief that Notre Dame is actually underrated in the polls at this point, I don’t think that I’ve agreed with a single Vegas line for the Irish all year. Miami isn’t nearly the pushover that it looked like they could have been after getting waxed by Kansas State.

Georgia (+1) over SOUTH CAROLINA – I think both of these teams are a bit overrated from the glow of the top of the SEC, but I have more faith in Georgia this year.

RAMS (+2.5) over Cardinals – Arizona is worse than their record and, as I said last week, St. Louis is better than their record.

REDSKINS (+3) over Falcons – I don’t quite know what to make of the Redskins so far this season, but RGIII certainly makes them interesting.

JAGUARS (+5) over Bears – The Bears should be winning this game, but this is the type of matchup that always puts us fans on edge. We were at least able to count on Bad Romo rearing his head this past Monday night.

(6) Classic Music Video of the Week – “Here I Go Again” by Whitesnake

If the Mo Money Mo Problems video was a late-1990s time capsule, then this classic from Whitesnake is everything that a late-1980s trash rock video should feature: lots of hair, lots of guitars, and lots of a pre-husband abuse/Celebrity Rehab Tawny Kitaen. Of course, this song is also a favorite of my namesake Frank the Tank.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Hook ’em! My only problem with your poll is the OSU ranking. From what I’ve seen this year, Florida, Texas, and Oregon St. would mop the floor with the Buckeyes, and I think I’d favor severalof the one loss teams in the top 25 over them as well.

Well, this is the big week to find out if this Northwestern squad is one of the special ones (not really that make or break on the season but historically it is).

Northwestern’s two biggest regular seasons stumbling blocks (excluding Ohio State) are here: haven’t been 6-0 in like 50 years and Penn State is on a winning streak against Northwestern along with a lot of big comeback wins…

wrt Wisconsin-Illinois, the coldest handicapper I’ve seen (“cold” as in “doing awful”, not as in “ruthless” or “cool”) loves Wisconsin. That’s not quite enough to push me on the Illini bandwagon here, but if the line moves up further…

Alan – I agree with Frank. I think people are being a little quick in dropping LSU. I think guys have just been playing down to the competition that last couple of games. People seem to forgetting the Washington game, and Washington has looked pretty good since that game. You guys still are stacked on defense. If LSU can keep defenders off of your QB, I think they will be fine. We’ll definitely know for sure after Saturday. I’m actually going to be pulling for y’all in this game.

Alan – Looks like I was wrong. I guess losing your LT has hurt worse than I figured it would. Plus it looks like your QB has no confidence at all. Having USCe coming into Death Valley this week is probably not what you guys need to get things straightened out (but at least it is in Death Valley).

I was hoping you guys could pull it out since that was Bama’s best chance at having a high profile game for the remainder of the regular season. Maybe Miss St can break the top 15 if some teams lose in the next couple of week, and maybe aTm can if they win out; but other than that, Bama just won’t play anyone else in the top 10 or 15 until the SECCG.

Alan – It looks like LSU is fighting a war of attrition this season and each week brings more bad news. The loss to the Gators was big but it was not like the Gamecocks rolling up a huge score on Georgia. It is not like your Tigers are going to suddenly fold and lose the rest of their games. The game with Alabama still has yet to be played and anything can happen at this point. The only 2 road games you guys have left are both winnable. Oddly, with that loss you guys are the underdogs going forward and the target will be on the other guys back now.

bamatab and duff – I had a client in town all week, so I’m sorry to be so late in responding. While LSU is down to 70 scholarship players at this point in the season due to injuries, suspensions, dismissals, and transfers, the Tigers still have some talent, a great defense, special teams that are better than most, a stable of four and five star running backs, and some pride. In the Miles era, LSU has only lost two in a row once, and has never lost in Tiger Stadium coming off of a loss. The game tonight is at night. South Carolina has never handled prosperity very well, and the Cocks are in the middle of a brutal 3 week stretch (UGA, @LSU, @UF).

On the down side, LSU may be starting two freshmen on the O-line tonight, and the receivers can’t catch a cold at this point. Losing an All-American LT and sure 1st-rounder in Chris Faulk has been a tougher loss than I expected. With all the problems LSU has had this season and as poorly as the offense has performed, the Tigers are probably only one fumble away from being undefeated.

In 2003, LSU rebounded from a Florida loss, the win the BCS. In 2008, LSU was decimated by injuries and dismissals, suffered its first loss to Florida and went on the lose 4 more games. Tonight’s game will tell a lot.

That was a great win for LSU, not perfect like you said, but just what they needed. It’s hard to walk into Death Valley at night and pullout a win, much less after having a huge emotional blowout win the previous week. I don’t know where #33 came from, but that kid can run the ball. Your QB still isn’t playing very well, and your OL is still a question mark. But your defense is still an elite defense, and that will always give you a chance to win. Next week will be an interesting game at aTm. It’ll be interesting to see if A&M’s QB can play like he has been against your defense (something tells me he won’t).

bamatab – 4-star recruit Jeremy Hill should have been in the 2011 signing class. In addition to LSU, he received scholarship offers from Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, and Tennessee. LSU pulled his offer when he got into some off-field trouble. Hill spent the last year and a half getting his personal situation straightened out. Since he had already graduated from high school, Hill did not figure into the 2012 signing class rankings.

To me La Tech is a no-brainer BCS team if they beat A+M and run the table (and of course, if ACC and B10 troubles help open up slots). Good OOC wins and some of their Sun Belt conference wins would have more credibility because THOSE teams had good OOC wins.

Based on what they’ve done so far, I think LSU is the overrated SEC team. They went unbeaten in 2011. Its tough to do that twice. Somebody besides Alabama beats them. Not sure who.

TCU may be overrated now that their QB is suspended indefinitely for a DWI. They were a good bet to go 7-0 before their OU/OSU/KSU/WVU/UT finish.

I don’t think the A10 contract demonstrates anything. They are all at best 2nd string behind the BE/ACC/BIG in their markets. Its mostly a bunch of tiny private schools playing in gyms that would embarrass an Indiana high school. They really were trying to be a BE clone at one point in time. GT/GW; Villanova/St.Joes,LaSalle; St. John,Seton Hall/Fordham; Pitt/Duquesne; SU/St. Bonaventure; BC/UMass; Providence/RI; Cincy/Xavier, Dayton; DePaul, Marquette/St. Louis. The BE Catholic schools are vastly bigger names and most have been to the final 4 and several have won. I can see them taking the best of the A10 and getting the same deal they would with the BE, which is only likely to be in the $3 million range (based on $10 million for a full member).

@bullet – I honestly believe the West Coast Conference would end up providing them with a home. Even though the WCC has all private schools, Air Force’s profile would fit in well and they have a friend there with BYU. Air Force’s position change is more about (1) the losses that the Mountain West has sustained and (2) Navy is definitely in the Big East fold now (whereas that seemed to be more of a longshot at this time last year).

@bullet – Ouch – that should be really interesting if ESPN has to hand those over. I personally believe that college athletes ought to get compensated on a free market basis, but thought the law was on the side of the universities. This Ed O’Bannon case has been going on for awhile.

That’s not based on much right now. Sure, IN and IL look terrible and OSU and PSU can’t play in the game. WI has improved some on offense, though. Let’s talk after next weekend when PU and WI play. The winner will essentially have a 2 game lead.

Pro-PU:

PU hosts WI and PSU
PU misses NE and MSU

Pro-WI:

WI hosts OSU
WI misses MI
WI has a later bye
WI has no back to back road games

What does this mean? With 95% confidence we can say that the SG metric is an effective predictor of total wins. On average, a five unit unit increase in SG (that is, an additional five plays run per opponent TD) is correlated with an additional win.

Since we do not see enough B1G vs B12 match ups we never get the chance to test this more often with B12 schools. The only such matchup was the Iowa vs Iowa State (6-9) affair with only 1TD to show for the entire game and that was on the opening drive of the game.

Because that would have meant fewer nationally televised games. Right now all BYU’s home games are broadcast nationally on ESPN except for the one they put on BYU TV. Add in a couple of OOC games against schools like UT and ND, and right now BYU usually gets 8 or 9 nationally televised games plus one for their own network.

If they moved to the Big XII they would be looking at more regional coverage since UT and OU get most of the nationally televised games. And even though the number of national broadcasts the conference gets increased with the new TV deal, BYU would still looking at only 3 or so national games a year.

Plus, the WCC lets BYU broadcast a ton of stuff on BYU TV (the network broadcast the MBB tournament a couple years ago even though BYU still hadn’t joined the conference) and ESPN gives BYU unlimited replay rights for BYU TV (including same day) which the Big XII might not.

Is that actually true? WVU has already had three nationally televised games, and we’re only four games into the season. I haven’t been able to locate a comprehensive list that shows every nationally televised 2012 game to date, but three a year seems pretty low. I agree they probably wouldn’t get all but one, but I don’t know if the drop-off would be that big.

I had originally posted my response with two links to lsufootball.net, and its still showing for me as “Your comment is awaiting moderation.” So that could be the reason. I’m also not seeing it at the bottom of the page, its showing in the correct spot for me, probably because I created the offending post.

1. WVU is benefiting from being on a potential national title run and having the excitement of having the Heisman frontrunner.

2. The Big XII just signed a new contract that increased the number of national broadcasts the conference gets. BYU really had no way of knowing about that. I can’t find the link, but I remember a BYU blogger ran through the numbers using the Big XII’s old contract and found that BYU would probably only get 3-4 national broadcasts if they went to the Big XII (that is including the fact they wouldn’t be able to handout 2 for 1’s left in right if they joined the Big XII because of the 9 game schedule)

Is $70 the average price for tickets? Student tickets are definitely cheaper than that (unless they’ve doubled them in the last 4 years, which half wouldn’t surprise given the way they skyrocket tuition).

I just used the standard face value. Student tickets are discounted. They paid either $272 for all 8 games or $136 for the 4 B10 games (Block O is $20 more), so the equivalent of $34 per game.
PSU also discounts student tickets, to $218 for 7 games or $31.14 per game.

My point wasn’t to be accurate, but to show the difference between the two despite both having huge stadiums. There are too many different prices or donation levels for me to get accurate numbers anyway. All season ticket holders at OSU had to donate at least $1500 per seat (#1 in the nation, only ND at $1250 was also over $600 per seat in 2010 http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1094191).

PSU’s minimum is $100 per seat. With their new plan, they are dropping the donation for about 11,500 seats by $200. That’s $2.3M per year they’re giving up in hopes of making double that back by selling out.

Rob Neyer called the O’s regular season “magical marvelous miraculous”, which sounds dead-on (I’d add “improbable”, “unbelievable”, and “astounding” as well). If not for the A’s own miraculous run, your O’s would be America’s sole underdog darlings this MLB postseason.

Rangers helped both those teams; their collapse down the stretch this year has got to be as bad as the Red Sox’s last year.

A source close to the school’s athletic department told the Daily Herald that UVU [Utah Valley University] has officially been invited to join the Western Athletic Conference.

According to the source, the school received a letter of invitation this week and will make it official at a press conference scheduled for next week, where it is expected that the WAC will introduce UVU along with Cal State University-Bakersfield as the newest conference members beginning in the 2013-14 season.

I’m somewhat surprised the conference members haven’t just thrown in the towel and decided to forgo expansion efforts in favor of attempting to join other leagues on their own. Idaho has essentially an open invitation to the Big Sky. New Mexico State can get into the Southland. Denver, ideally, would LOVE to join Air Force as a travel partner in the West Coast Conference or the Mo. Valley Conference if/when AFA football goes to the Big East. At worst, Denver would be better off in the Summit League than it is in the WAC. Seattle is really the only member without a realistic better option.

1. If Miami gets a postseason ban that stretches out to 2015 thanks to the Nevin Shapiro stuff, PSU should schedule to play a HaH series with them with the game in Miami in the first week of December (when conference championship games are held) in 2015.

2. In 2016 (the first year the post-season ban is lifted), they should schedule to play @Hawaii late in the season. With a 65-man roster, the chances that they’d be competing for a bowl bid in 2016 are pretty close to nil anyway. It would give the kids who sign up at PSU something extra to look forward to, at least.

Hmm. Evidently, PSU doesn’t have a bye week late in the season in 2016. However, if they can persuade Rutgers to move their game @Rutgers to a later year, PSU could play @Hawaii the first week of December.

What I mean is most conferences use BCS standings as tiebreakers (though it’s one of the last tiebreakers) which means everyone in the conference needs to have finished their schedules since the results of a hypothetical PSU-Miami game could effect the SOS of their opponents.

Actually, that’s not clear at all. They won’t be used the way they are now, but the committee might keep them around (or a variant of them) to serve as a guideline for seeding the bowls and playoffs like the MBB committee uses RPI.

Either way, if the conferences are going to continue to use any sort of SOS or other mathematical formula as part of a tiebreaker all the teams will need to wrap up their seasons before championship week.

(Plus the conferences wouldn’t allow a game like this anyways, since they will want any competition for their CCG’s)

If the standings were close it could matter, especially if only one of the teams played Penn St and the other didn’t. It’s a long shot, but it is certainly not out of the question.

And scheduling the game could be tricky if the ACC and Big 10 don’t want to compete against each other.

And even if they could get the game to avoid both the ACC and Big 10 CCG’s ESPN and Fox would probably step in stop it. (Fox is expecting its $24 million investment to be the only Big 10 game that week)

“And even if they could get the game to avoid both the ACC and Big 10 CCG’s ESPN and Fox would probably step in stop it. (Fox is expecting its $24 million investment to be the only Big 10 game that week)”

. . . said Frug, without proof from anything.

I really seriously don’t think they’d care, because another game with another B10 team will have zero impact on the number of viewers who watch the B10 title game.

I don’t want to overreact to one game, but would you care to revise your opinion on NW now?

I told you I saw 3 tiers of games:
should win but could be upset – IN, IL
toss ups – MN, PSU, IA
should lose but could pull upset – MI, MSU, NE

You were sure NW would sweep the easier 5 and guaranteed an upset to go 6-2. I said NW would go 2-1 in the tossups and lose all 3 to the top teams to end up 4-4. I agreed 5-3 was perfectly reasonable, though.

Because you predicted 6-2. Saying you are more confident in getting at least 1 upset than in sweeping the other 5 doesn’t mean you aren’t almost sure NW will sweep the other 5. Being “much less confident” than “very confident” doesn’t mean much. That still sounds like you’re confident in the sweep to me. Perhaps that isn’t how you intended it, but that’s how it came across.

NW has @MI, @MSU after a bye in November, so that seems like a tough stretch. They get NE at home in 2 weeks, but NE looks like the best of the 3 right now. Only purple glasses make someone very confident of an upset among those 3, let alone 2 to make up for losing a game to the lesser teams.

I’ll take O over D for a 1-dimensional team. You have to score to win. NE has enough D to slow down MSU. The question is whether the reverse is true. None of the 3 are head and shoulders above PSU, no, but PSU just beat NW handily and MI and MSU also get them at home.

Did you watch the game? Trailing by 2 scores at the start of the 4th and trailing until there were less than 3 minutes left in the game does not qualify as “beating NU handily” in my book.

Tacking on a TD in garbage time after getting the ball again deep in NU territory after NU had turned the ball over on downs does not mean that the game suddenly went from being “tight” to “winning handily”.

Yes, I watched the whole thing. PSU won by 11, gave up less than 250 yards, gained almost 450 yards and had over 39:00 TOP. It was closer on the scoreboard than on the field largely because of the punt return and muffed punt. PSU dominated the last 16 minutes of the game, and both offenses stunk up the first quarter for the most part. NW made 2 good drives all game, really.

I think hurry up is good from the offense and score angle. The downside is it leaves your defense on the field quite a bit. It felt like Michigan State was on offense forever and when IU had the ball they decided not to run which made them really 1 dimensional. Exactly how much of that was Michigan State really doing well on defense and how much IU was a deer in the headlights after the first half I am still trying to decide.

a) you must be able to complete passes
b) you must have a running game that can threaten

I was hoping for a favorable 3 game stretch with Navy, Illinois, and Iowa but now I am thinking it could get really ugly. Thank god basketball is here and things should start looking up.

ps, before you say it I am also rethinking my Purdue projections. On the upside I though Michigan and Penn State would do better once conference play got rolling and so far they are getting it done. Depression has set in now that the only undefeated team left can not represent the B1G in the post season. I still see some good defense in the B1G but the national media is not going to be talking about it.

Before anyone says anything, yes Mizzou lost at home to Vandy 19 to 15.

Our QB hurt his knee after being out earlier with a hurt shoulder. He’s expected to be out for the next few weeks.

Our only backup is a RS Freshman and he’s not ready for prime time. He went 9-30 in the game.

I don’t expect Missouri to win many games if any with this QB.

Looks like it will be Mizzou’s worst season in 10 years.

We really did have a good starting QB coming into the season. He was honorable mention all-big 12. Has a ton of career yards. Had he stayed healthy this season would have been a different story. As it is we just can’t seem to score very many points. Mizzou’s offense is dependent on having a decent QB. It relies on passing to a large extent. We had a couple of decent backup QBs transfer away. We could have used them now.

At least our defense has been decent this year, but it won’t matter much now.

There’s nothing to say. Everyone’s taking their licks this season; it’s just that kind of year.

I don’t think there’s many teams performing above expectations; maybe only a couple of Big Six teams are performing at or above expectations (Florida, K-State probably leading the group), but most of college football seems to be in rebuilding even more than recent years…

I also just want to add; I don’t think I’ve seen a worse year for offenses in certain leagues and defenses in other leagues in a long time (you know which are which). Sometimes it looks like one half of the teams in a competition didn’t even show up…

One doubts they’re saying “not a great day for the ACC” in the Research Triangle after UNC beat Va. Tech, Duke hammered UVa and NCSU rallied to beat FSU. There’s a lot of balance in the conference this year, and who knows — perhaps Duke will be this year’s Wake, 2006.

NCSU wasn’t that big a surprise. FSU loses to North Carolina teams more than anyone else for some reason. Wake had their number for a few years. I believe NCSU had 3 and UNC 1 of the 1st 5 wins over FSU in the ACC. All time NCSU is 10-22 vs. FSU. Noone other than Florida, Miami, Auburn, Houston and VT have more wins against FSU.

Tennessee will be the biggest winner from the NCST win. They beat them 35-21 at a neutral site game. Florida may be the biggest loser as that degrades the end of the season game with Florida State for SoS calculations.

As I said a week ago, Ohio St. and La. Tech seem the most likely to run the table. Although Oregon is starting to look pretty good. SEC and Big 12 winners seem likely to have a loss. Not sure how good TCU in the Big 12 will be w/o their QB. They dominated the stats vs. ISU w/o him but turned it over 5 times.

Everyone has flaws. KSU has been doing what it takes in crunch time and that leaves you vulnerable. Snyder isn’t going to be successful outworking the other coaches every week. WVU didn’t really bother covering the Baylor receivers last week. Texas, apparently to rest their own big play deficient defense, didn’t really test the WVU secondary much and still scored 45.

I gave up trying to under estimate the Snyder factor and I just came to accept it. KSU losing a game or 2 in the B12 is possible but so is running the table. The game on the 20th when the Wildcats travel to Morgantown in a test of offense vs defense in the B12 will clear the picture.

I don’t think it would be easier for Bama to have a loss this year than OR or WV/KSU. Bama probably won’t play another top 10 team for the rest of the regular season (unless Miss St and/or aTm win out), and will probably be pretty heavily favored in those games with the exception of LSU (who we will still be favored over, but not heavily). OR still has to play Stanford and possibly USC twice, while WV & KSU still have to play each other while WV also has to play OU and KSU has to play UT. I think Bama’s biggest regular season opponent this year will be themselves (as in beating themselves by not playing up to their capability). Heck, depending on how many losses the SEC East champ ends up with, Bama could be favored somewhat highly against them as well. Now I’m not saying that Bama has a cakewalk the rest of the way, but they stand no greater chance of losing one than any of the other contenders.

This Ohio State team looks like a BCS team for sure at the very worst and a legit national title contender if it runs the table.

I’m still in disbelief that they didn’t just dock themselves and hope that would placate the NCAA.

Then again it doesn’t really matter. Ohio State is loaded and with the recruiting classes he’s bringing in; they’re going to run amok for the next decade.

Only Michigan is bringing in talent that’s similar to what Ohio State has, and they still look another 2 years away from being stocked enough to compete with what Tressel left combined with what Meyer’s bringing in…

Realistically, it’s the only way the B10 will produce national title contenders again. The Wisconsin Way (& the Iowa Way) won’t ever produce a national title contender. Realistically, MSU needs Michigan to be down (and probably OSU as well) to get enough talent to be a national title contender. While the folks in Lincoln aim high, I don’t believe UNL will be in the national title discussion in the future simply because they’re so far away from all sources of talent. The only other B10 school besides OSU (and sometimes Michigan; more likely if Hoke ever finds himself another Tom Brady) with the money, brand, support, and local & nearby talent base to potentially be a national title contender isn’t going to contend for a decade due to transgressions at Happy Valley.

The B10 over the next decade or so could very well look a lot like the BE when Miami was in it, with OSU in the role of Miami (winning the conference a little over half the time, contending for the national title most years, and ending up with a couple national titles) & Michigan in the role of VTech (winning the conference some years and even challenging for the national title a year or 2). Only 2 other schools won BE titles in those 13 years, though (WVU & Syracuse), which wouldn’t be great to see in the B10. On the other hand, you could say half the conference won the BE outright at least once in those 13 years. If 6 different schools won B10 titles between now and 2025, that wouldn’t be so bad.

Just looking through recruiting data, it really seems like there’s going to be a big gap between Ohio State/Michigan and the rest of the conference for the next couple of years.

Penn State is really the only school with the recruiting grounds to compete regularly with those two in terms of the upper echelon recruits but they’re going to be another 5 years or so in their mess.

Nebraska and then Wisconsin/Michigan State/Iowa are going to be the next group but it just seems as if it’s going to be a bit too hard for them to come close to Ohio State/Michigan in terms of the number of blue chip recruits.

It’s usually been that way, but OSU and MI still found plenty of ways to lose to other B10 teams. The other teams may not be nationally elite, but they’re more than good enough to pull an upset and win the B10 on occasion.

Have you noticed how people have stopped claiming that Meyer left no talent at UF now that the Gators are good again? Last year, it was all people wanted to talk about when discussing UF. Funny how winning changes their perspective.

The B12 rankings
– West Virginia showed no defense and was rewarded with #5 / #4
– Kansas State got jumped by West Virginia #6 / #5
– Texas lost at home and only dropped slightly #15 / #15
– Oklahoma played weak scheduler Texas Tech and got a big bump #13 / #10
– TCU has played nobody and still made the Top 25
– Iowa State squeaked in on beating TCU to make the Top 25

Kansas State has played the tougher schedule and got passed by West Virginia who has played the softer schedule and has no proven defense. Texas is supposed to have the best defense in the B12 yet they still allowed West Virginia to score almost 50 points in a home game for Texas. Oklahoma beat up on a team with a powder puff schedule and still got about as much love as an undefeated Oregon State team with 2 ranked wins and all 4 wins against AQ schools. I still say based on actual games played the PAC is a tougher conference than the B12.

The 3 game OOC padding the B12 enjoys means 80% of the conference has 0 or 1 loss. This will continue to perpetuate the myth that the B12 is the toughest conference according to Sagarin. I find it impossible to believe the B12 is better than the PAC and SEC. I find it even harder to believe that every B12 team except Kansas is a Top 30 type team! Especially when confronted by the simple fact that only a team or 2 in the conference seem to know how to play defense. How this conference can get 6 teams in the Top 25 is beyond belief.

Impossible to believe that a 12 team conference like the B1G has fallen below the WAC and MWC while the B 12 can put 6 teams in the Top 25 with only 10 teams.

Just because you are the best conference doesn’t mean you have the best team. The AFC had a winning record vs. the NFC from 1984-1996 but the NFC still won the Super Bowl every year because they generally had the best team.

In addition the pros have a narrow gap from top to bottom based on cost of entry and limited teams. There is no non AQ or FCS type teams in the NFL as it is more like a collection of all AQ schools. Using your pro analogy the B12 gets credit for exhibition games on their regular season more than any other AQ conference.

Former B12 schools in the upper half historically are not yet showing it in the SEC
0-3 Missouri vs Georgia, South Carolina, and historic east bottom Vanderbilt
2-1 TAMU vs Florida, Arkansas, and historic west bottom Mississippi

Former B12 schools in the upper half historically are not yet showing it in the B1G
1-1 Nebraska vs Wisconsin and Ohio State (granted both are better historically)

Former B12 schools in the upper half historically are not yet showing it in the PAC
1-1 Colorado vs UCLA and and historic bottom Washington State

.

In 3 games with B1G schools Notre Dame (Irish got 2 TD’s vs PU, 2 TD’s from MSU, and 1 TD from UM) equaled the 5 TD’s they got in the Miami game. This seems to indicate the B1G can play defense better than the ACC. We will get a picture of the B 12 defense when the Irish travel to Norman. The problem is this will be the only Top 25 team a B12 will face in their OOC so it limits a more accurate understanding. What I find interesting is all 4 former B12 are struggling in 3 different new homes based mostly on issues with their defense yet somehow the lesser schools left behind are better with even more inferior defenses?

I pointed this out last week, and I’ll point it out again. The only thing indicated by your analysis is that, using certain criteria you came up with, the high performance of the Big 12 in 2012 so far in evidence is an unlikely outcome.

You have done nothing to show:
1. That your criteria are even remotely useful for analyzing anything, or
2. In the event that your criteria are useful, that an unlikely set of events has not, in fact, occurred.

Given that seemingly every other method of analyzing college football rates the Big 12 higher than you do, I’m inclined to think it’s very likely that your criteria are off base to begin with.

I am watching the BCS show on ESPN right now and they are talking about Oregon or West Virginia vs Alabama in the MNC. Is it possible that Kansas State or Notre Dame would be the better choices because they appear to know how to play defense? You know the old saying about defense winning championships right? High flying games work in West Virginia vs Baylor or West Virginia vs Texas but they will get destroyed if Alabama in the west or South Carolina in the east are the teams they face. Texas did not get into the end zone till very late in the MNC game and their vaunted defense did not stop Alabama. I know the Texas QB went out early but he was not a starter on the longhorn defense.

If Vanderbilt can rush Mizzou all night it tells me a B12 team with no defense and unprepared for the speed / pressure will get clobbered in a bowl game. Last season West Virginia put 70 points on Clemson but only 21 on LSU. Unlike the game against the Tigers in Morgantown where WVU had the home town crowd this years BCS game is in SEC country. If Notre Dame beats Oklahoma @ Norman in a manner similar to the way Kansas State beat Oklahoma in Norman or in a similar manner to the way they have limited the points of Miami, Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue is it just possible that I am not off base?

I rate football by who is holding the crystal trophy at the end of the year and in the past decade or so of the BCS it has not been games where both sides are scoring lots of points like you are seeing in these B12 vs B12 or B12 vs PAC games we have seen in the realignment era. The last game where 2 offenses lit it up was Texas vs Southern Cal and both schools already have a loss this season. I can buy that the B12 has good teams and possibly a great one I just find it hard to believe that all of them – less Kansas – are that great. I find it doubtful that Michigan State or Northwestern would be the next to worse team in the B12.

Will you still say I am off base if Notre Dame limits Oklahoma or Kansas State limits West Virginia when they meet this season?

While I agree that it’s not realistic that 9 of the B12 teams are top 30 I’d suggest waiting the season gets nearer the end before getting too worked up. There is plenty of time for imposters to be exposed and slow starters to get on a roll. The larger the data set the more accurate the extrapolations.

Oregon may not be Alabama like on defense but giving up 50 first half points through 6 games (while scoring 228) isn’t shabby, especially with the way they score so quickly the D is constantly on the field.

It is interesting that the ESPN Power Rankings only has 4 B 12 teams in their Top 25 as well and 3 of the 4 have more media appeal than Kansas State who may be the best team in the conference. Part of the problem may be propping up good but not great B12 teams and freeing up those spots for teams from other conferences.

.

@ m(Ag)

Mizzou was without their top QB but it was more of the O line I was referring to. Vandy is not the best defense in the SEC but their defense was still getting quick penetration. The general point was even the bad SEC schools can play defense while the better B12 schools do not. I watched the Northwestern vs Vanderbilt game all the way through and the Vandy kids played tough. As noted in the long post above Vanderbilt was sitting at #64 in Sagarin yet I could easily see them holding their own as a middle of the pack B12 team this season. The same could be said for Northwestern sitting at #48 when B12 teams #26 Texas Tech, #30 Baylor, and #32 Iowa State were all ahead of them. Northwestern may no longer have a MNC shot but I can see them getting a good bowl at the end of the season.

I have seen 3 of Northwestern’s games this season (Vanderbilt, Indiana, and Penn State) so I had to use them as my proxy : Northwestern to Vanderbilt to Missouri to B12. Again, because there was not enough B12 OOC interaction and I did not see the Iowa vs Iowa State game, I had less to gauge the conferences than I would have liked.

Duffman, I will absolutely say you are still off base if those scenarios occur. I’m not arguing against you because I think that WVU is necessarily a better team than ND, or KSU, or whomever. I’m arguing that your model has a fundamental gap in its logic. The main data points you seem to rely on, if I have followed correctly, are:

1. Apparent strength of schedule
2. Timing of bye weeks
3. Historical performance in the form of national championships
4. Historical performance in the form of head to head records between teams
5. An anecdotal preference for defense over offense

Explain the mechanism by which FSU became a worse team when it had to put Savannah State on its schedule instead of WVU.

Explain how taking an early bye week makes a team worse.

Explain how the 2012 WVU team would be better than it is currently if Major Harris and the 1988 Mountaineers had defeated Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl, or if Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno flipped their series records when Bowden was at WVU. Maybe you can argue that a team would have better recruiting etc over time if it had more historical success, but there is no conceivable logic that discounts a team’s present-day performance, as presently constituted, based on events that happened that far in the past.

If you want to argue that defense wins championships, you’re free to do so. It may well do so this year, but sports cliches are cheaper than they are reliable.

I think that you should acknowledge that your analysis is subjective and anecdotal, cherry-picking a select few objective facts that confirm your own biases, and ignoring objective facts that don’t support your narrative.

Explain the mechanism by which FSU became a worse team when it had to put Savannah State on its schedule instead of WVU.

Picking the exception negates the big picture. I understand realignment altered the schedules of schools like TAMU and FSU but it did not alter the 8 core B12 schools. Texas Tech was a bad scheduler before realignment. Texas under Mack Brown slid well down from OOC scheduling before that. Why is Oklahoma the exception to OOC scheduling instead of the rule is the better question to ask? Adding West Virginia vs Maryland and TCU vs Virginia went a long way to making the B12 OOC scheduling look less bleak and neither of those ACC schools are historic power football schools. Missouri was scheduling Arizona State and TAMU was scheduling Arkansas before they left. Baylor, Kansas, and Texas Tech did not schedule a single AQ school OOC! How can you defend that?

Explain how taking an early bye week makes a team worse.>/b>

The opposite is true. It makes then look artificially inflated with a phantom win. If all the other conferences are 4-0 and all the B12 schools are 3-0 they still get credit in the minds of voters of being undefeated. Michigan came out of the gates 2-2 but both losses were to Top 5 teams in the country away from The Big House. Texas Tech was sitting at 4-0 and ranked for not playing anybody. That dead space non game puts an artificial bonus that none of the other 5 AQ conferences seem to exploit. Coupled with weak OOC scheduling and all the B12 schools look like world beaters for the first 6 weeks or so of the season. After that they get a halo effect for the rest of the season as those 3-0 starts make the first impression.

Put the shoe on the other foot. Suppose the B1G or SEC played played 3 games when everybody else was playing 4 and they did so against the bottom end of FBS and FCS football? The PAC is another conference that plays only 3 OOC games but you do not see them dodging the AQ teams in those 3 games. Just compare the conferences :

Again if not for the Virginia and Maryland games, the B12 would have 5 OOC AQ games TOTAL for the entire conference. Why is the B12 the only conference of the 6 to schedule so weak and take so many early dates off? Could it be to inflate the perceived strength of the B12? I really hope TCU and WVU continue to schedule better than their conference mates to shame them into playing by the same rules everybody else does.

Maybe you can argue that a team would have better recruiting etc over time if it had more historical success, but there is no conceivable logic that discounts a team’s present-day performance, as presently constituted, based on events that happened that far in the past.

The key to past success is all those living alumni who fill your stadiums 20+ years later and write the big donor checks. It is not just accident that the schools with the most sustainable programs have stadiums that seat 75,000 or more. With few exceptions, like the Chicago Cubs, people like to follow winners. This is basic human nature and explains why Ohio State has 100,000+ seats and Indiana has about half of that. Notre Dame can be down for a decade or so and still generate more money and media numbers than a 1 hit wonder from a power conference. Do you really think what happened 20 years ago does not affect the Buckeye’s ability to hire a coach like Urban Meyer? Do you not think that all that money flowing into Columbus does not fuel the facilities and added cost of top flight support staff?

If you want to argue that defense wins championships, you’re free to do so. It may well do so this year, but sports cliches are cheaper than they are reliable.

I went through the BCS MNC all the way back to 1998 in a previous post and showed especially how the past decade of the MNC has been ruled by defense not offense. That is not cliches it is cold hard facts. if you had wagered each event on just who had the better defense you would have made a large sum of money in the past decade. I think only the Texas vs Southern Cal game was a contest determined by offensive output. Cold hard cash over a decade is pretty good in my book.

I think that you should acknowledge that your analysis is subjective and anecdotal, cherry-picking a select few objective facts that confirm your own biases, and ignoring objective facts that don’t support your narrative.

I think you should show me your facts (not just based on polls and computer rankings) where you can disprove the following :

a) The B12 does not schedule the weakest OOC of the 6 AQ’s
b) The B12 does not puff their power by taking very early off weeks
c) The B12 can win the crystal football with just offense over defense often
d) The B12 is better without the 4 schools and CCG they no longer have
e) The B12 is able to put a team not named Texas / Oklahoma in a MNC game
f) The B12 and PAC both play 3OOC, yet the B12 plays 1/2 the AQ’s

@Duffman
When can the Big 10 put someone other than Ohio St. in the BCS title game?
When can the ACC put someone other than FSU in the BCS title game (Miami and VT were in the BE)?
When can the Pac 12 put someone other than USC or Oregon in the BCS title game?
When can the Big East put anyone still in the conference in the BCS title game?
When can the CUSA, MWC, MAC, SB, WAC or Indies put anyone in the title game?

Actually you have to go back 10 years to find anyone in the title game other than Texas, OU, Ohio St., USC, Oregon or an SEC team.

If you are only looking at the top of the conference and look at the top 5 in the final AP rankings from 2000 to present, using projected 2014 membership, you have a “Big 3” conferences, 1 middle and then the rest:

Big 12 5 teams 13 times 1.30 per team (UT/OU/OSU/TCU/WVU)
SEC 8 teams 18 times 1.29 per team (FL/LSU/AL/AU/UGA/TN/AR/MO)
Pac 12 6 teams 15 times 1.25 per team (USC/OR/UT/ST/OSU/UW)
B1G 2 teams 8 times 0.67 per team (7 of 8 OSU-1 PSU, both on probation this year)
ACC 1 team 4 times 0.29 per team (and none of these were when
Miami was an ACC member)
Big East 1 team 2 times 0.15 per team (Boise who isn’t a member yet)

“Explain the mechanism by which FSU became a worse team when it had to put Savannah State on its schedule instead of WVU.”

Picking the exception negates the big picture.

Way to completely ignore his point. Ignore the example. Explain the mechanism by which any team becomes worse just by playing a weak schedule. SOS does NOT equal quality of the team. AL would still be the best team this year even if they played in the WAC.

“Explain how taking an early bye week makes a team worse.”

The opposite is true. It makes then look artificially inflated with a phantom win. If all the other conferences are 4-0 and all the B12 schools are 3-0 they still get credit in the minds of voters of being undefeated.

…

Put the shoe on the other foot. Suppose the B1G or SEC played played 3 games when everybody else was playing 4 and they did so against the bottom end of FBS and FCS football?

This is the dumbest argument you’ve made yet on this topic, and that’s saying a lot. An early bye week is a bad thing because it means you have to play 9 straight tough games. No coach wants it that way.

They get credit for being undefeated because they are, in fact, undefeated.

“Maybe you can argue that a team would have better recruiting etc over time if it had more historical success, but there is no conceivable logic that discounts a team’s present-day performance, as presently constituted, based on events that happened that far in the past.”

The key to past success is all those living alumni who fill your stadiums 20+ years later and write the big donor checks. It is not just accident that the schools with the most sustainable programs have stadiums that seat 75,000 or more. With few exceptions, like the Chicago Cubs, people like to follow winners. This is basic human nature and explains why Ohio State has 100,000+ seats and Indiana has about half of that. Notre Dame can be down for a decade or so and still generate more money and media numbers than a 1 hit wonder from a power conference. Do you really think what happened 20 years ago does not affect the Buckeye’s ability to hire a coach like Urban Meyer? Do you not think that all that money flowing into Columbus does not fuel the facilities and added cost of top flight support staff?

Another stupid argument. Everyone else is talking about how good an individual team is this year, and your talking about hypothetical differences if their past was changed. The coach is who he is and the payers are who they are. The question is how good is the team right now, not how good the team might have been if they won a national title 20 years ago.

“I think that you should acknowledge that your analysis is subjective and anecdotal, cherry-picking a select few objective facts that confirm your own biases, and ignoring objective facts that don’t support your narrative.”

I think you should show me your facts (not just based on polls and computer rankings) where you can disprove the following :

a) The B12 does not schedule the weakest OOC of the 6 AQ’s
b) The B12 does not puff their power by taking very early off weeks
c) The B12 can win the crystal football with just offense over defense often
d) The B12 is better without the 4 schools and CCG they no longer have
e) The B12 is able to put a team not named Texas / Oklahoma in a MNC game
f) The B12 and PAC both play 3OOC, yet the B12 plays 1/2 the AQ’s

a. Nobody but you was ever arguing this point. Nobody else but you cares. Everyone else recognizes that they play 12 games, not 3, and all 12 matter equally. We can also separate team quality from SOS.

b. You’re asking him to prove a negative. Where’s your proof for the affirmative?

c. Where did he say they could? Or did you just pull “often” out of your butt? The B12 made a lot of BCS NCGs and won a few. How many makes an “often” anyway?

d. Did he claim they were better, or did he agree with everyone else but you that the quality of the 2012 teams is completely independent from the former makeup of the league? Do you honestly believe that playing in a CCG automatically makes a team better? Is the MAC champ suddenly a powerhouse now since they play a CCG?

e. What’s your point? OkSU should have been in the NCG last year and NE was in it before so clearly the B12 can put someone other than UT or OU in the NCG. Are OU and UT’s skill level suddenly dependent on whether or not WV has made the NCG in the past? Can the P12 put anyone but USC or OR in the NCG? Can the B10 put anyone but OSU in? Can the ACC put anyone in?

f. Again, so what? This says nothing about how good the B12 teams are.

I think the biggest reason the B12 got so many teams in the BCS MNC game was the CCG. Same with the SEC because it gave both the value of having to play the 13th game. I think the point you make about Ohio State in the past is valid but you have seen a shift in dynamics. The B12 had 3 MNC game schools (UT, OU, and UNL) and now they have 2. In addition the B1G had 1 and now it has 2. In the next decade it would not surprise me to see the B1G have multiple MNC game teams the same way the SEC has. Look at the dynamics.

Ohio State = Alabama : the school most likely to be there
Michigan = Tennessee : the down school that still has the resources to play
Penn State = Florida : the big state school with access to recruits
Nebraska = LSU : the big state school with loyal fans and no competition

This means both conferences can support multiple teams through their rise and fall with big followings and smooth out the edges. The next 4 in either conference can have a breakout season and still have a loyal following to drive ratings. Going forward these 2 conferences have the bodies to make the numbers strong. the problem with the B12 is you only have 2 brand schools in the 10 and they are not likely to add another top football brand.

The point being that the ACC / B1G / PAC / SEC have enough big teams to smooth out the peaks and valleys of any single school. The Big East does not as they do not have even 1 market leader in their whole conference. The B12 only has 2 so they will be non factors in years when Texas or Oklahoma are not on top. just look at the other 8.

TCU & Baylor = private schools who can’t sell limited seats when they are good
KSU & Kansas = not football powers (snyder can not live forever)
Texas Tech = #3 in the state at best with no chance to displace #1 or #2
Oklahoma State = #2 in state like Michigan State to Michigan
Iowa State = #2 in Iowa is like #6 in a high population state
West Virginia = ?? could become a mini Nebraska or could be a mini Mizzou

.

You can say I am crazy but the wind does blow different for the big dogs

Right now you have undefeated possibilities as follows :

#1 undefeated SEC team through 13 games
#2 undefeated Notre Dame through 12 games
#3 undefeated PAC team through 13 games
#4 undefeated BigE team through 12 games
#5 undefeated B12 team through 12 games
#6 undefeated WAC team through 12 games

based on the past the undefeated SEC team would get the first MNC slot

the big question would be who gets the other side!

Notre Dame probably has the inside track based on SoS and media clout
Oregon probably follows them, but Oregon State is not as clear cut
UT or OU would be obvious, but KSU or WVU are not as clear
WVU would get the nod over KSU if either were undefeated in the end
No telling with an undefeated Louisville or Cincinnati
La Tech probably gets in over undefeated Rutgers

.
…
.

@Duffman
When can the Big 10 put someone other than Ohio St. in the BCS title game?
answered above
When can the ACC put someone other than FSU in the BCS title game?
see above but add VT, Miami, and Notre Dame
When can the Pac 12 put someone other than USC or Oregon in the BCS title game?
I agree with your point but might add a few more
When can the Big East put anyone still in the conference in the BCS title game?
I think they are dead man walking
When can the CUSA, MWC, MAC, SB, WAC or Indies put anyone in the title game?
Magic 8 ball says no!

Actually you have to go back 10 years to find anyone in the title game other than Texas, OU, Ohio St., USC, Oregon or an SEC team.

This is my point, beyond Texas and Oklahoma when has the B12 gotten another MNC team from the other 8 teams! The B12 footprint is shrinking not growing and you have the reincarnation of the SWC which means going back to a regional conference over a super regional one. In all these posts people keep making about the other 8 schools they keep acting like they were already in the MNC game in the BCS era which is delusional / wishful thinking.

Look at it another way if you must. Where would Urban Meyer go if he was not at Ohio State? Go back to my “stepping stones” job pyramid and think if Kansas State will ever be higher than Nebraska in the pecking order? Will West Virginia be higher than Tennessee? You can look at polls and computer rankings all day long but is the Baylor job better than Michigan? is the Iowa State job likely to be higher than the Southern Cal one? If Muschamp left Florida in good standing (sufficient wins and not fired) name the schools in the current B12 he would take over Florida?

Another stupid argument. Everyone else is talking about how good an individual team is this year, and your talking about hypothetical differences if their past was changed. The coach is who he is and the payers are who they are. The question is how good is the team right now, not how good the team might have been if they won a national title 20 years ago.

@ brian

So the money and success of Ohio State in the past had nothing to do with Urban Meyer deciding to coach there? You call my argument stupid but refuse to see this very same thing is what got Ohio State the coach they have now! This january it will be 1 decade removed from the last Ohio State MNC and yet this very event allowed the current decision (more telling is Dantonio is still in the B1G as a HC after a stint at Cincinnati) on his current coaching choice.

Big, wealthy schools get the pick of the litter when the head coaches get selected. If you tell me Indiana had the same shot at Meyer as the Buckeyes I will tell you to lay off the brown acid. Ohio State is a destination job and at least 8 current B12 schools can not make this claim. If one is, please feel free to enlighten me.

Nothing you have said has any relevance to how strong the Big 12 is this year. And based on what has actually happened since the turn of the century, your arguments apply more to the Big 10 and ACC than to the Big 12. They’ve been carried by a single team or by no teams at all.

If you are talking economics, there is some point to your arguments (but it applies to the Pac 12 and ACC as well). But its totally irrelevant to strength on the field this year or last. In fact, Texas has been down (13-12) and OU hasn’t been an MNC contender, and the Big 12 has been rated as 1st or close to 1st by just about everyone the last two years.

Maybe I am splitting hairs to you but there is a great deal of difference between perceived strength and real strength. The B12 is still in the afterglow of the former B12 and MNC wins that are getting farther in the rear view mirror. The fact that a team from the AQ conference with the lowest power can be atop the one thought to be the best in a single season is a telling sign indeed. If it were Northwestern swapped with West Virginia in the first year would anybody be saying the B12 was a powerhouse this season? No, they would be saying the B12 was over rated if a historic middle to lower B1G team could come in and dominate it. This is why I doubt the overall power of the B12.

Right now the Big East has 3 undefeated teams with 8 members while the B12 has only 2 with 10 members. Going by you logic of only using this season maybe the Big East is better than the B12 12 this season!

.

Nothing you have said has any relevance to how strong the Big 12 is this year. And based on what has actually happened since the turn of the century, your arguments apply more to the Big 10 and ACC than to the Big 12. They’ve been carried by a single team or by no teams at all.

.

In 2010 – 2011 the Sooner’s were #7 and played an unranked 8-4 Big East team for their bowl game and Uconn still hung 20 points on the folks from Norman. Earlier in that same season Oklahoma was #9 when they played a 4-8 Cincinnati team from the Big East and escaped with a 31-29 win. I think that Cincinnati game exposed Oklahoma then, but it was quickly forgotten by the mainstream media. The other top teams that season actually played other ranked schools for their wins and losses. That same season a high scoring TCU team played a Wisconsin team that held them to a 1/2 or 1/3 of their normal offensive output that season. TCU got a 2 point win at 21-19, but it was far from the 41 points they hung on Baylor that season. Last bowl season the majority of B12 schools played inferior schools so they should have won and they did. Whoopty doo!

The only evenly matched top B12 team vs the B1G or SEC was the #2 B12 Kansas State vs the #3 SEC Arkansas. If West Virginia is undefeated at this seasons end and Ohio State is as well I would take the Buckeyes for the head to head win 90% of the time. I would take a 3-2 Michigan right now over at least 6 B12 schools about 80% of the time. The problem is because the B12 plays the OOC schedule they do we never get to see these kind of games. We are just supposed to accept them beating a bunch of non conference fluff and each other as gospel that they are the greatest conference ever? I just am not buying it.

Look I am not saying it is all the B12’s fault. I blame part of it on folks who vote by final scores because they are too lazy to watch the games or follow the actual quality of the games. At least some in the media are actually calling out the B12 for their pre conference scheduling but they are still a minority. You yourself have called out the PAC and ACC as being weaker yet these are the teams the B12 is scheduling. Oklahoma no longer plays Nebraska, Texas no longer plays TAMU, and Kansas no longer plays Mizzou so such tests between the conferences that would help settle this power issue no longer get played and college football as a whole is worse off for it. The ACC, Big East, and SEC have ridden their 4 inter conference games to the bank every year.

For all the ballyhoo about Baylor last season they did not play a single AQ school in their OOC games. Oklahoma State did the same (if you swap a 4-8 Arizona for a non AQ) with their OOC schedule. Mack Brown talks about how Texas is getting “more like an SEC team” yet the longhorns can’t stop anybody. Brian Kelly is not saying such nonsense but his Irish team is looking more like a B1G / SEC team that wins with defense. You say the B1G is being carried by a single team and the past, but it looks just like the B12 being carried by 2 teams and their past. Take away Texas and Oklahoma (and Nebraska now they are in the B1G) and the B12 has not put a single team in a BCS MNC game. TCU, West Virginia, Baylor, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Kansas State, Iowa State, and Kansas combined are a big ZERO in BCS MNC game appearances.

@Duffman
Once again, you are ignoring my point. Name any conference other than the SEC that has had multiple top teams. Every complaint you have against the Big 12 could be said many times over about the Big 10 and ACC and Pac 12. The scheduling and afterglow apply to the Big 10, SEC and ACC as well (noone plays as many FCS schools as the ACC). Arkansas was the ONLY team Alabama beat last season prior to the bowls who was in the final top 25. They didn’t play UGA or S. Carolina. But they were a name brand who was expected to be good and who was in a conference that had won 5 straight MNCs.

WV beat the ACC champ 70-33 last year, was expected to be better this year and has the leading Heisman candidate. Noone questions them because they came from the Big East. Last year’s results, expectations and Heisman candidates may not be fair factors, but they impact polls. And they apply to all the schools. LSU and TCU are the prime examples this year. LSU had 2 lousy weeks, then got beat by Florida and is still in the top 10. TCU lost 4 defensive starters over the summer and their QB (now for the season), but are still ranked by the coaches. There were high expectations for both teams and both teams do have talent, but both are rated too high based on what they have actually done on the field. USC is rated above Stanford, despite their game and both having 1 loss.

“So the money and success of Ohio State in the past had nothing to do with Urban Meyer deciding to coach there?”

IT DOESN’T MATTER WHY HE IS THERE. THE 2012 TEAM IS AS GOOD OR BAD AS IT IS, PERIOD. NOTHING ELSE MATTERS TO THIS DISCUSSION. EVERYONE BUT YOU UNDERSTANDS THIS FACT.

“You call my argument stupid”

Because it is.

“but refuse to see this very same thing is what got Ohio State the coach they have now!”

No, I know full well why Meyer is there. But that doesn’t make the 2012 team any better or worse than it is. You are too anti-B12 to acknowledge this fact, however, because it wouldn’t fit the fictional narrative you have derived.

“I think the biggest reason the B12 got so many teams in the BCS MNC game was the CCG. Same with the SEC because it gave both the value of having to play the 13th game.”

Too bad the facts don’t back you up (again). The B12 lost NCG spots due to CCG upsets.

1998 – #3 KSU lost in OT and stayed at #3 instead of moving up when #2 UCLA lost
2001 – NE didn’t win their division but went to the NCG
2003 – OU lost the CCG and still went to the NCG
2004 – OU stayed #2 despite winning the CCG while USC didn’t play one
2005 – UT stayed #2 despite winning the CCG while USC didn’t play one
2007 – #1 MO lost the CCG and missed any BCS bowl
2008 – #2 OU moved to #1 when #1 AL lost, but they were in the NCG before the CCG (UT was #3)
2009 – #3 UT moved to #2 because #1 played #2 in the SECCG. The teams behind them (UC, TCU) didn’t play a CCG, so the CCG didn’t help UT. UF dropped to #5 with their loss.

“When can the ACC put someone other than FSU in the BCS title game?
see above but add VT, Miami, and Notre Dame”

Since when is ND part of the ACC? VT has seen the NCG once with a transcendent player (Mike Vick). Miami hasn’t been the same since OSU beat them for the title and the NCAA is about to hammer them.

“Actually you have to go back 10 years to find anyone in the title game other than Texas, OU, Ohio St., USC, Oregon or an SEC team.

This is my point, beyond Texas and Oklahoma when has the B12 gotten another MNC team from the other 8 teams!”

You have no point. The B12 and P12 both have 2 teams on that list, the B10 1 and everyone else none. There is no way, shape or form in which that looks bad for the B12.

“In all these posts people keep making about the other 8 schools they keep acting like they were already in the MNC game in the BCS era which is delusional / wishful thinking.”

OkSU should have been in. WV would have been in except they choked against Pitt in 2007. TCU was undefeated and #4. KSU has been #3 at the end of the year. Yes, I can’t imagine why anybody thinks any of those teams might have a shot.

I am not ignoring your point (that the same few schools get into the BCS MNC game) but you are missing my point that West Virginia and Kansas State are not one of those schools! Neither B12 school has the same cache as Texas, OU, Ohio St., USC, Oregon or an SEC team. that you noted in your previous post. Kansas State or West Virginia could feel firsthand the emotion of that 2004 Auburn team that went 13 – 0 and did not play in the BCS MMC.

.

Arkansas was the ONLY team Alabama beat last season prior to the bowls who was in the final top 25. They didn’t play UGA or S. Carolina. But they were a name brand who was expected to be good and who was in a conference that had won 5 straight MNCs.

Alabama beat a Top 25 Penn State @ Penn State before the Sandusky bomb
Alabama beat #14 Arkansas @ HOME the week they played
Alabama beat #12 Florida @ Florida the week they played
Alabama got beat by #1 LSU @ HOME the week they played by a field goal

Alabama played 7 teams last season that played in bowls

I will grant you Alabama missed the top SEC east schools last season but Sagarin ranked their SoS as #15 out of 246 D I teams. I still think Sagarin is full of poop as he had LSU as the 7th toughest when they beat the PAC & Big East champions on the road and played NINE ranked teams in a 14 game season. Sagarin had Oklahoma State at 3 when they only played FIVE during their 13 game season.

How many D I schools could have played Alabama’s schedule last season and emerged with just 1 loss? You say I stretch points and manipulate data but seriously even I would not knock that schedule. How can you even begin to defend that point?

“Maybe I am splitting hairs to you but there is a great deal of difference between perceived strength and real strength.”

We all agree. And we all think you have decided that the B12 has no strength despite absolutely no evidence to back you up. You are completely irrational on this topic. It’s hardly like I’m known as a staunch B12 supporter, but your arguments are ludicrous.

“In 2010 – 2011 the Sooner’s were #7 and played an unranked 8-4 Big East team for their bowl game and Uconn still hung 20 points on the folks from Norman.”

They won by 28 points and you are using it against them? That makes sense.

1. UConn got a pick 6 in the 2nd quarter.
2. UConn got a KO return for a TD in the 3rd.

Without those, it’s 48-6. So tell us all again how bad their defense was.

#1 So you are saying Ohio State being undefeated has nothing to do with Urban Meyer?

#2 Notre Dame will join the ACC in 27 months but based on previous history they could be there as early as next season. Playing 5 ACC schools is 3 short of an 8 team ACC schedule, so yes for all realistic purposes Notre Dame is now an ACC school. If they are not a full football member in a decade or two I will be amazed.

OkSU should have been in. WV would have been in except they choked against Pitt in 2007. TCU was undefeated and #4. KSU has been #3 at the end of the year. Yes, I can’t imagine why anybody thinks any of those teams might have a shot.

– Oklahoma State could have been in if their OOC was better, none were ranked
their OOC wins = 9-4 La La, 4-8 Arizona, and 8-5 Tulsa
– WVU ranked wins were #18 USF, #25 RU, #21 UC, and #20 Uconn = all Big East
at the end of the season USF 9-4, RU 8-5, UC 10-3, and Uconn 9-4
– TCU went 12-0 in the MWC and faced #24 Oregon State and #6 Utah
at the end of the season Oregon State was 5-7 and Utah was 10-3
– #2 Big 12 Kansas State got beat by # 3 or #4 SEC Arkansas
personally I would love to see Snyder vs Miles last year : Wizard vs Mad Hatter!

MWC / Big East = apples
B 12 = oranges

If either TCU (2010) or WVU (2007) were in the B 12 at the time, neither would have been in the discussion in the first place!

Florida and PSU were overrated at the time and unranked at the end of the season, so what they were at the time is not relevant to the end of year evaluation. I don’t think there has been any MNC since BYU to beat only 1 team ranked in the final poll (Alabama obviously did get LSU the 2nd time around). And if you are going to quote Sagarin, he had the Big 12 ranked 3,5,6,7, 13 and one more in the top 25 (Missouri was 15th or 16th-while future member TCU was #18). So either you buy Sagarin or you shouldn’t use him to try to support arguments.

@Duffman
You are still ignoring the point. 8 teams in the Big 10 don’t have the cachet of Ohio St. and 10 haven’t been anywhere close to an MNC since the turn of the century (only PSU once finished in the top 5). 12 of the 14 ACC schools don’t have the cachet of Miami and none have been anywhere close to an MNC since the turn of the century. Even Miami hasn’t been there during its ACC years.

5 of the current 10 Big 12 schools have finished in the top 5.
6 of the current 12 Pac 12 schools have finished in the top 5.
8 of the current 14 SEC schools have finished in the top 5 (including Missouri-the only Big 12 school to leave to achieve that this century).

As Brian pointed out, KSU would have made the BCS title game in 98 except for a loss in the ccg and WVU in 2007 except for the loss in the Pitt rivalry game. TCU would have if the Alabama player had held the ball better on that breakaway at the end of the 2nd Q vs. Auburn and not let it get stripped. OSU should have been there last year. Even KU has ended up in the final top 10 twice in the last 20 years, something the bottom third of the Big 10 haven’t achieved even once. 8 of the 14 ACC schools haven’t even been there once.

Other than the SEC which has a very strong, consistent upper middle class (LSU/UGA/TN/AU), the Big 12 isn’t that different from the other conferences in having an upper class. And it certainly has not been reflected on the field in the last 10-12 years as many schools have stepped up.

We all agree. And we all think you have decided that the B12 has no strength despite absolutely no evidence to back you up.

I have given Kansas State and probably 2 other B12 schools the credit to be in the Top 25 so I am not saying they are a non AQ conference type bad! The issue is I do not think 6 or 7 teams B12 are Top 25 teams. I have been pretty clear on this the whole time. I am not saying they are terrible, just that many are over rated in the computers and polls.

over rated is not the same as non competitive!

.

Without those, it’s 48-6. So tell us all again how bad their defense was.

Earlier that season a Cincinnati Bearcat team with a 4-8 record lost 29 – 31!

The best B12 team that season (Oklahoma) came within a field goal of losing to the 2nd worst team (Cincinnati) in the Big East! Oklahoma had 4 touchdowns and Cincinnati had 3. If the Bearcat kicker does not miss the extra point it is a 1 point game. If the Bearcats to not fumble in the end zone early in the second quarter they win by a touchdown! I watched most of this game and was amazed how a top B12 team could struggle so against a Big East team. This was the game that made me begin to wonder just how good the B12 really was.

Considering 3 of the 5 ranked B12 teams are now gone and Oklahoma seems to get more love than they deserve and what do you have left? A good but not great Oklahoma State team with a unique quarterback and receiver that are now gone. RG III is playing on sundays and Texas still does not seem to have a defense even tho everybody seems to feel they do.

************************************************

saying :

Kansas State is a Top 10 team currently (might argue Top 5)
West Virginia is a Top 20 team currently
OU vs UT winner should be a Top 20 team after the game
the other 7 schools are not Top 25 currently based on games played

is not saying :

NO B12 team deserves to be ranked

************************************************

Which is what you are implying I am saying!!!!

.
…
.

a) Mississippi State, Louisville, Rutgers are all 5-0 but none of them are ahead of 5-0 West Virginia, 3-1 Oklahoma, or 4-1 Texas.
b) If La Tech was Boise State (last season) or TCU (season before) and sitting at 5-0 they would be in the Top 10 instead of sitting at the edge of the polls!

TCU in 2010 when they were 5-0 : #5 in AP and #5 in USA
beat Oregon State, Tennessee Tech, Baylor, SMU, and Colorado State

Boise State in 2011 when they were 5-0 : #5 in AP and #6 in USA
beat Georgia, Toledo, Tulsa, Nevada, and Fresno State

La Tech in 2012 when they are 5-0 : #23 in AP and #24 in USA
beat Houston, Rice, Illinois, Virginia, and UNLV

“#1 So you are saying Ohio State being undefeated has nothing to do with Urban Meyer?”

Yes, that’s exactly what I said. Clearly.

You:
So the money and success of Ohio State in the past had nothing to do with Urban Meyer deciding to coach there?”

Me:
IT DOESN’T MATTER WHY HE IS THERE. THE 2012 TEAM IS AS GOOD OR BAD AS IT IS, PERIOD. NOTHING ELSE MATTERS TO THIS DISCUSSION. EVERYONE BUT YOU UNDERSTANDS THIS FACT.

How does that possibly convert to Meyer doesn’t matter? Do you even read what others write anymore or do you just make up the other side of the conversation to better suit you?

“#2 Notre Dame will join the ACC in 27 months but based on previous history they could be there as early as next season.”

Not in football they won’t. They’ll start playing a few more ACC teams per year. The ACC doesn’t magically get credit for ND making a NCG.

“Playing 5 ACC schools is 3 short of an 8 team ACC schedule, so yes for all realistic purposes Notre Dame is now an ACC school.”

Maybe in your version of reality, but that’s not the earth I live on. Playing 7 non-ACC teams each year is quite different from being an ACC member to rational people.

“If they are not a full football member in a decade or two I will be amazed.”

Again, completely irrelevant. After ND joins, then the ACC can start taking credit for ND’s accomplishments. Not before that.

OkSU should have been in. WV would have been in except they choked against Pitt in 2007. TCU was undefeated and #4. KSU has been #3 at the end of the year. Yes, I can’t imagine why anybody thinks any of those teams might have a shot.

“- Oklahoma State could have been in if their OOC was better, none were ranked
their OOC wins = 9-4 La La, 4-8 Arizona, and 8-5 Tulsa”

How horrible. They played 2 teams with winning I-A records and 1 AQ with 4 wins.

Maybe the voters would have insisted on keeping AL high enough to make the NCG anyway, since that’s what happened.

“Without those, it’s 48-6. So tell us all again how bad their defense was.

Earlier that season a Cincinnati Bearcat team with a 4-8 record lost 29 – 31!

The best B12 team that season (Oklahoma) came within a field goal of losing to the 2nd worst team (Cincinnati) in the Big East!”

Did they win or lose? That is the point of the game, right?

Every title winner has a close game or two. OSU had a bunch of close games when they won the national title. That didn’t make them less good. It meant they weren’t explosive on offense and that they knew how to win close games. They still beat a juggernaut Miami team for the title.

“Which is what you are implying I am saying!!!!”

No, I’m saying you’re saying this:

The B12 sucks, they used to have other teams that had historical success, the B12 sucks, the new members can’t possibly be good, the B12 sucks, any objective system that disagrees with me (and they all do) must be horribly flawed, the B12 sucks, TN won a national title 15 years ago, the B12 sucks, NE used to be elite, the B12 sucks, every critique I make should also apply to all non-SEC conferences but I won’t admit it, the B12 sucks, the B12 has 2 kings, the B12 sucks, nonsense, the B12 sucks, more nonsense, the B12 sucks, and by the way the B12 sucks.

Florida and PSU were overrated at the time and unranked at the end of the season, so what they were at the time is not relevant to the end of year evaluation.

You can’t be serious about Penn State! They were 8-1 (the lone Alabama loss by 16) before Sandusky. Post Sandusky they were 1-3 and the Nebraska loss was a field goal and the Ohio State loss was 6 points. It it possible without the off field distraction Penn State finishes a Top 10 to Top 20 team? Florida was a solid middle SEC team last year, which while below their norm, was still better than most 6-6 teams and still beat Ohio State in the bowl game. Again, Alabama faced 7 teams that played in the post season one of whom was #1 or #2 for almost the entire season and they had to play them twice!

And if you are going to quote Sagarin, he had the Big 12 ranked 3,5,6,7, 13 and one more in the top 25 (Missouri was 15th or 16th-while future member TCU was #18). So either you buy Sagarin or you shouldn’t use him to try to support arguments.

if you read the actual post :

I will grant you Alabama missed the top SEC east schools last season but Sagarin ranked their SoS as #15 out of 246 D I teams. I still think Sagarin is full of poop as he had LSU as the 7th toughest when they beat the PAC & Big East champions on the road and played NINE ranked teams in a 14 game season. Sagarin had Oklahoma State at 3 when they only played FIVE during their 13 game season.

My sentiments on Sagarin are expressed pretty clearly! I was not using him to support the argument as I was specifically pointing out how flawed it was for not putting Alan’s Tigers as the #1 SoS for last season. The implication (as you pointed out about #1 KU, #2, #3 oSu, #4 TAMU, #5 UT, #6 OU, #8 KSU – LSU was #7 so you probably meant Kansas State in the #8 slot – #10 BU, #11 TT, #13 MU) was that the B12 was over rated based on actual performance!

“#1 So you are saying Ohio State being undefeated has nothing to do with Urban Meyer?”

Yes, that’s exactly what I said. Clearly.

Then why are coaching hires so discussed? I guess Indiana and Ohio State should just swap coaches then as it matters not. Heck I would even add Yeagley as a thank you gift for that trade

.
…
.

“#2 Notre Dame will join the ACC in 27 months but based on previous history they could be there as early as next season.”

Did Notre Dame join the ACC over the B1G and B12? YES
Did Notre Dame leave the Big East to do this? YES
Did the Big East extract a 5 game (every year) while ND was a member? NO
Did the ACC extract a 5 game (every year) while ND was a member? YES
Does the Big East have a 50 million exit fee? NO
Does the ACC have a 50 million exit fee? YES
Is 5 > 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 ? YES
Is 5 > 6, 7, 8 ? NO

While Notre Dame is not a full ACC member they are no longer as IND as they once were. The wins and losses will not accrue to the ACC, I grant you that, but they will not accrue to the B1G or B12 either. The key point is that 5 games a year is a majority and it is something the Big East never got in writing. The Irish have already indicated a reduction in B1G exposure and they sure are not in a hurry to schedule B12 teams not named Texas or Oklahoma. The current ACC deals runs about 12 more years. Is it that hard to think those 3 games left become ACC games by the next contract and Notre Dame makes official what unofficially is already happened?

.
…
.

“If either TCU (2010) or WVU (2007) were in the B 12 at the time, neither would have been in the discussion in the first place!”

Based on what, your personal bias?

No, based on the math!

A team playing 1 or 2 Top 30 type college football has a much greater probability of going undefeated than a school that must play 3 or 4 Top 20 college football teams :

@Duffman
Last season Alabama beat Georgia Southern 45-21. They only got 45 because they PASSED for a TD in the last minute. Only Mississippi State came closer to Alabama than Georgia Southern (and it would have been the same except for that last minute running up the score by Saban). Noone scored more points than Georgia Southern against Alabama. GSU was close to them the whole game.

So that must mean the whole SEC is worse than an FBS team (that lost 2 other games) other than Alabama and LSU and they all had worse offenses. Well the later may be true, but the 1st is absurd, just like your 1 game Cincinnati analogy.

So once again, to you, results on the field don’t matter. Penn St. lost. And if you want to talk margins, they outscored their FBS opponents by 3 points for the season, and they had powerhouses ooc like Temple, Indiana St. and E. Michigan in those 8 wins, along with IU, PU, IA, NW and IL, none of whom won more than 7 games including bowls (and #9 Ohio St. had a losing record). When the critical game came for the championship, they got blown out.

I think there is a very good chance TCU would have beaten Oregon or Auburn that year. The reason, to use one of your arguments, they had a very good defense while Oregon and Auburn were talented, but porous. And TCU had a pretty good offense as well even if not at the Oregon/Auburn level that year. It would have been interesting to see. WI had the perfect team to exploit TCU’s defenses’s lack of size and didn’t do it.

“#1 So you are saying Ohio State being undefeated has nothing to do with Urban Meyer?”

Yes, that’s exactly what I said. Clearly.

Then why are coaching hires so discussed? I guess Indiana and Ohio State should just swap coaches then as it matters not. Heck I would even add Yeagley as a thank you gift for that trade

Go back and read what I wrote. Not what you think I said, but what I actually wrote. Especially the part after I quoted what you completed perverted into saying that coaches don’t matter.

WHAT DOESN’T MATTER IS WHY A COACH IS WHERE HE IS. THE TEAM IS AS GOOD AS IT IS AND NOTHING ELSE MATTERS. NOT PAST NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS, NOT CONFERENCE AFFILIATION, NOT ANYTHING.

“#2 Notre Dame will join the ACC in 27 months but based on previous history they could be there as early as next season.”

“Did Notre Dame join the ACC over the B1G and B12? YES”

Not in football, which is the what we’ve been discussing.

“Did Notre Dame leave the Big East to do this? YES”

Not in football, which is the what we’ve been discussing.

“Did the Big East extract a 5 game (every year) while ND was a member? NO”

What the BE got is irrelevant to you trying to give the ACC credit for ND’s accomplishments. Besides, ND was never a football member.

“Did the ACC extract a 5 game (every year) while ND was a member? YES”

The number of OOC games is irrelevant to you trying to give the ACC credit for ND’s accomplishments. ND is not a football member of the ACC and thus the ACC does NOT get credit for them. The fact that ND played 4 ACC teams in 2011 and plays 3 in 2012 (plus 1 2013 member) undermines you even more.

“Does the Big East have a 50 million exit fee? NO”

How can even you think that is relevant to the ACC getting credit for ND?

“Does the ACC have a 50 million exit fee? YES”

How can even you think that is relevant to the ACC getting credit for ND?

“While Notre Dame is not a full ACC member they are no longer as IND as they once were.”

Nice straw man. Nobody claimed nothing had changed.

“The wins and losses will not accrue to the ACC, I grant you that,”

Then why did they make your list of ACC teams that could make the NCG? That was you stating the ACC would get credit for that.

“but they will not accrue to the B1G or B12 either.”

So what? Nobody else has ever gotten credit for ND’s accomplishments. Why should anybody care about that not changing?

“The key point is that 5 games a year is a majority”

Not for ND it isn’t. 5 games is 42% of their schedule. Conference play is at least 58%, usually 67 or 75%.

“and it is something the Big East never got in writing.”

You are truly the master of the irrelevant.

“If either TCU (2010) or WVU (2007) were in the B 12 at the time, neither would have been in the discussion in the first place!”

Based on what, your personal bias?

No, based on the math!

A team playing 1 or 2 Top 30 type college football has a much greater probability of going undefeated than a school that must play 3 or 4 Top 20 college football teams :

That’s 13 major undefeated teams in 10 years, or 1.3 per year on average (there were a lot more from UC and non-AQs like Boise, TCU, Utah and HI). The math would never predict that any of them should be perfect either, but they were. In fact, it’s a regular occurrence even in the toughest conference. There’s no math that says TCU is incapable of going 12-0 now, they just need to be good/lucky enough to do it..

That’s 13 major undefeated teams in 10 years, or 1.3 per year on average (there were a lot more from UC and non-AQs like Boise, TCU, Utah and HI). The math would never predict that any of them should be perfect either, but they were. In fact, it’s a regular occurrence even in the toughest conference.

Brian,

You are wrong, just based on the ballpark data above it predicts that you should have at least 1 undefeated team per year! The bigger “brands” in the bigger conferences have wealth and prestige to increase their odds which is why certain schools have multiple MNC’s and some schools still do not have 1. While a team like TCU may have the resources to compete undefeated relative to their peer group some additional losses should be expected when they must compete against bigger and better teams in stronger conferences. Therefore TCU’s expected odds of an undefeated MWC run are greater than a their odds in the B12 until they can match the resources and prestige of a school like Texas or Oklahoma!

Handicapping horse racing is a similar study in math an probability when a horse moves up in class. Unlike racing, football is weekly so wear and tear plays a bigger part than a horse who may take a month off to get back to form. While I agree that luck / fate in some games plays a part but overall it is the quality of the players and resources to develop them that keeps top teams at the top. Nobody would doubt the power of Nick Saban as a coach but being at a school like Alabama, Oklahoma, Southern Cal, Notre Dame, or Ohio State just acts to multiply his ability which is why I added the Oklahoma in the B12 line for comparison.

1. OSU – 6-0, 2-0 with wins over preseason favorites MSU and NE
2. MI – everyone else has had a shot at #2, so it’s their turn
3. PSU – improving week to week
4. NE – has an offense and OSU game was closer than the score
5. MSU – still problematic on offense
6. NW – wilted against PSU
7. WI – slowly improving
8. PU – a good loss to ND but not much else
9. IA – whipped the Gophers
10. MN – better than last year, but a long way to go
11. IN – no D, injuries on O
12. IL – ugh

2-6 all seem pretty close to me as they all have strengths and glaring weaknesses.

OSU set a new attendance record of 106,102
Braxton Miller raised his OSU record for rushing yards by a QB in a game to 186
Carlos Hyde was the first OSU RB to score 4 TDs in a B10 game since Eddie George

OSU did nothing on O in the first quarter, gaining 7 yards on 13 plays.
OSU scored TDs on 5 straight possessions, 6 of 7 and 7 of 9 starting in the 2nd quarter.

The issue is when the big teams do not win on the national stage. Just look at the past few weeks. Oklahoma, Texas, Florida State, and Miami losing in big TV games hurts conference views much more than if Kansas State and North Carolina State do. This coming week Oklahoma or Texas must lose when they play each other. If Oklahoma beats Texas and then loses to Notre Dame then the “brands” of the conference both have 2 losses and no hope at a MNC game shot. I am not saying it is fair but I am not discounting the power either. If it was Oklahoma last year with 1 loss and not Oklahoma State they would have played LSU for the National Championship over Alabama. If it were a 10-2 Texas and not a 10-2 Kansas State I am willing to bet my bottom dollar there would have been 2 B12 schools in BCS bowls last january and not just 1. The issue seems to center around keeping too many B12 teams artificially inflated beyond their actual representation.

The problem is from now on by default the B12 can only generate 50% wins as each win must be offset with a B12 loss. At most Kansas can only absorb 7 of the 36 losses still out there. This means about 3 more losses for the 9 remaining teams and 9 teams will go to bowls but none will play for the big prize. The alternative means a few teams do well (maybe 3 or 4 ranked teams) and several do not become bowl eligible. Viewed over the next 3 – 5 years the B12 will either have 1 – 3 teams float to the top (like the PAC) or they will become mired in mediocrity (like the ACC) but long term they can not sustain a 90% superior and 10% inferior level as they are currently viewed by the mainstream.

Early on the SEC and B12 embraced the CCG and grew perception with that 13th game. Now everybody has caught up while the B12 has actually gone the other way. If a year from now 5 of 6 AQ conferences play the CCG then dynamics will change to penalize the B12 for not doing so. Delany may let Texas or Oklahoma slide through but if an Oklahoma State or Kansas State costs the B1G a BCS slot it will not play well in the B1G war room. Ohio State and Penn State can not stay on probation forever so Delany will have to act to shore up the reputation of the B1G from B12 invasion.

Delany doesn’t make these decisions. The committee will reward teams for playing a tougher game in the ccg (not that Oregon did last year or the B1G northwest will this year-they actually lower their average sos), but they aren’t going to penalize those who don’t. Almost noone was making that argument when the ACC/SEC/Big 12/CUSA/MAC were playing ccgs.

But you are right about OU/OSU last year. And you see it with LSU this year. They’ve been in 3 bcs mnc games in the last decade and were expected to be very good, but, other than Washington, have looked very average on the field. Yet they are still in the top 10.

As for TCU/ISU, it shows that either the pollsters are not paying any attention or are paying a whole lot of attention and ignoring the results on the field and emphasizing the stats in the game and TCU’s loss of their QB for a DWI. I think the first is more likely. They probably don’t bother looking at the ISU and TCU scores.

Considering TCU’s uninspiring wins over SMU and Kansas, they weren’t looking good before they lost their QB. They may have been good in the past, but they have too many underclassmen playing this year to be judged on the results of previous years.

I said it before and will say it again on TCU – they are moving up the bell curve with the conference switch. I think they are still getting the media love they got as the outsider / underdog which is no more. I can still see them getting respectable 8 win seasons but their MNC contender days may be behind them now. I switched over during that game and was amazed how empty their stadium was for a ranked team. That is never a good sign.

.

@ bullet

Delany is the face of the B1G and he gets the marching orders from the collective. I was using him in that capacity for the comment. The bigger picture is that like it or not there is a pecking order in the AQ conferences. The top of that order is the B1G and SEC and at best the B12 is the next tier down. The attendance numbers and media values discussed on here for the last several years have put that out there pretty clearly. I do agree LSU gets “afterglow” for their recent BSC history but I can say the same about Texas and Oklahoma. The difference is the Oklahoma glow burned brightly after the 2001 Orange Bowl and the Texas glow burned brightly after the 2006 Rose Bowl.

The problem is we live in a society with the attention span of a gnat. 2003 was a great year for the Buckeyes but the national focused reversed after 2007 and 2008. The only school who seems to have escaped the “loser” stigma is Oregon and it may be due the game being close, the negative attention on Cam Newton, being a placeholder for Southern Cal, or Phil Knight just pumping cash into the Ducks. LSU lost a game before the Alabama rematch and already the focus has shifted to the SEC east teams.

The big question is will Oklahoma and Texas return to dominate their conference like Southern Cal and Oregon do or will they lose key games and sink the way Florida State did to NC State this weekend? Even if the whole state of Kansas supported Kansas State that does not help them break out of the local level. Every time Oklahoma State is #1 in OK it cannibalizes the Sooners for power. The difference is Oklahoma State and Kansas State will have tough long term sledding gaining a fan base that can sell out 80,000 – 100,000 seats. It can happen but the probability is low.

Think about it, the B12 anchors are already out of the MNC game and they have not even played their biggest (RRR) game. TAMU is gone so there goes the #2 game for Texas and Bedlam this year will already feature a 2 loss Oklahoma State. Kansas State seats 50K and West Virginia seats 60K and they are the only remaining undefeated teams in the conference. They meet in about 2 weeks to see who will carry the banner from that point on. The B12 relying on the secondary schools for national ratings would be like the ACC numbers if NC State and Maryland were both undefeated right now.

duff – regarding empty seats at TCU, the field is visible from the concourse all the way around the stadium. Also, big flats screen monitors are everywhere. TCU has a couple thousand club seats that are readily visible for the TV cameras. I attended the TCU/UVA game, and while it looked like the stadium was half-empty, the place was full. Most of the unsold tickets for the TCU/Iowa State game were from the Iowa State allotment.

Amon Carter Stadium has been called the Camden Yards of college football, and from an architectural standpoint, that’s quite a compliment. Unfortunately, from the tailgating to the atmosphere during the game, it still feels like a baseball stadium (at least from my SEC viewpoint). Private schools other than Notre Dame, USCw, and Miami don’t have t-shirt fans and a ga-zillion alums. TCU has less than 80,000 living alums. I still think that TCU can make a successful jump to big-time college football because they have a disproportionately large group of committed and very wealthy alums that live in the Fort Worth area, the city of Fort Worth supports TCU better than most cities support their private schools, the administration is completely committed to making football work on a long-term basis, and Gary Patterson is a great coach that doesn’t appear to have any ambition to leave.

I do think Baylor has the potential to be consistently good, as well. With a new on-campus stadium, the support Waco gives the school, and that its THE Baptist school in a region where Baptists are the dominant denomination. At least it feels that way.

Even with a new on-campus stadium, Tulane will continue to struggle. Unlike TCU and Baylor, where most alums live in Texas, most of Tulane’s alums live outside of Louisiana.

On TCU I am still not clear if their capacity is 45K or 50K after the upgrade. I watched a good chunk of the UVA game on TV and I think I saw parts of the Iowa State game. The Virginia one is the one that looked like empty seats on TV. It was showing paid attendance for the game at 46,330 and you say it was full. Do fans not sit in their seats and just wander around? Was it the section the camera kept hitting was just an empty one? I think the trend is to monitors and TV’s but at that point what is different from just watching it at a sports bar? I do know I wish they would count attendance by actual turnstile and not tickets sold but that will not happen.

They had a Top 25 team and RG III yet they were still well below capacity of 50,000. If they are spending 250,000,000 on a new stadium and they are not filling the old one what is the point? That is about 5,500 per seat in a tough economy. Take 7,000 student seats out of the equation and you are fast approaching 7,000 per seat.

I am not debating the attractiveness of the facility just the ability to fill it. Autzen cost 2.5 million to build and 80 million to upgrade about a decade ago. It has not hurt their standing in football not to blow 250 million on a new stadium. Lets say the Ducks have 100 million in, that would leave them 150 million to spend elsewhere in the university. Are mid to low level schools enriching their programs long term or just enriching a few well connected folks in the construction trade?

duff – only 4 private schools can put more than 50,000 butts in seats. My understanding is that Amon Carter Stadium’s capacity is 44,357 but can be expanded to 50,000 with a third upper deck on the East side.

Here’s the stadium capacities for all private schools that are currently AQ or will be in the next few years:

I did attend the UVA game and yes people were wandering around. It felt more like a MLB Baseball game. When the UVA game also kicked off at 11am, the temperature was over 90 decrees and not there wasn’t a cloud in the sky. The concourses were packed at least in part due to the heat and sun. The Iowa State game took place during the students’ fall break and many kids went home for the long weekend. TCU is the only private school to move up in conference realignment, with SMU following in the future. As I stated in an earlier post, I think the TCU fan base can move up, but it will take some time. They aren’t there yet, as my daughter communicated to me after their first game.

Regarding Baylor’s current stadium, its off campus and a dump. I would think their new on-campus stadium will help.

I include these numbers because it translates into alums. Other than BYU, Notre Dame, USC, and Miami, the privates generally don’t have t-shirt fans and alums usually aren’t as concentrated instate. For example, on the low side,over 80% of Tulane’s undergrads aren’t from Louisiana, and on the high side, 49% of TCU’s freshmen class are Texans.

duff – regarding the spending on Baylor’s new stadium and other private schools, if alums or friends of the university want to give a bunch of money to build a new stadium, the schools aren’t likely to turn it down. If a stadium isn’t built, its not like those alums will still give that money to the library. For example, six TCU alums donated $15mm each to help rebuild their stadium and TCU raised all the money ($164mm) during the silent phase of their capital campaign. The former Houston Astros owner is giving a big chunk to Baylor for its new stadium. The Saints owner is giving a big chunk to Tulane for its new stadium. Its not like the stadiums are getting built with tuition money.

Rice, TCU and SMU used to have T-shirt fans, but the Oilers and Cowboys ended that. Rice actually needed their 70k stadium in the 50s. A&M actually played 10 straight years in Houston because they drew better there than in College Station. In one of their stadium renovation proposals, they may end up playing in Houston for a year or so. If they follow that plan, it would probably be at Reliant, but who knows, maybe back at Rice. And the Cotton Bowl with 65k was the “House that Doak built,” after Doak Walker, the SMU player from the late 40s.

If a stadium isn’t built, its not like those alums will still give that money to the library.

Which is the sad part of your comment. Football is great and fun to watch but it will not build our bridges or educate our people. 15 million from 6 TCU alumni = 90 million in scholarship money would throw off at least 5 million in scholarships each and every year. It would be nice if sports giving was done in matching funds were every dollar raised went 50 cents to sports and 50 cents to education.

.

Its not like the stadiums are getting built with tuition money.

It is more than just the buildings getting built but the annual staffing, upkeep, maintenance, and operational costs coupled with a spend the budget mentality.

OSU lost 1 of their 2 experienced LBs for 4 weeks due to an injury. If it had to happen, I suppose now is as good a time as any. The first 4 weeks the team had to gel, and then we faced MSU and NE. The upcoming games are @IN, PU, @PSU, IL, BYE. That gives the young replacement 2 weeks to get up to speed before facing PSU, and Sabino an extra week to heal before facing @WI and MI to finish the season.

I don’t see much of an issue. UNO is contemplating building a new arena near campus that is roughly half the size of its current one (16K to 8K). UNO will probably incur some fan loss due to some hardcore Husker fans who now have a Husker hockey team to cheer for, but the casual fans generally won’t drive to Lincoln and back for hockey. The major concern I’ve heard about is with Nebraska basketball. Is there enough support in Lincoln for both basketball and hockey? I honestly think so, due to the support of the USHL team in Lincoln (4-5K a game). If just the USHL fans became UNL fans, it would place UNL in the upper tier for fan support in NCAA hockey.

I don’t have any problem with Oregon #1, but it points out how out of line Billingsley is. All the other computer polls have Oregon #6 or lower. Billingsley just has some real outlier results every year.

If Oregon keeps winning then they should be up in the top 3 soon in the Sagarin numbers. Right now they are sixth in his ELO model (which is what the BCS uses) but third in his predictor model. As the season goes on those two numbers will increasingly converge.

Outlier computer results are a good thing. They show that by different measures, a very different set of results can be obtained. Otherwise, why use multiple computer systems? As the season progresses, the outliers tend to diminish as more data yields more similar results anyway.

Remember, the computers can’t consider MOV. With only 6 games per team so far and only W/L to consider, the computers should disagree.

In their game against Vandy they had three starting O-Linemen out with injuries, two 2nd string o-linemen out with injuries, the starting QB out with injuries (an honorable mention all big 12 selection last year with 2800 yds passing and 900 yds rushing last year) replaced by a freshman QB who is clearly not ready. Also 5 players were out because of suspensions for off the field stuff, and one of our better LBs was out with an injury as well. Shorthanded would be an understatement.

The QB has been banged up and in and out of games since game 2 against Georgia. The O-Line injuries started in the off season and got worse and worse.

Mizzou had one of the better offenses in the country last year. Because of injuries it is now statistically one of the very worst in the country. As you noted, these young O-limenen we’ve got in there (some of them are true freshmen) cannot block SEC defenses. Our QBs are getting brutalized on every single play.

It’s not even that we didn’t have enough linmen. It’s juts a lot of injuries. 5 out of our top 10 linemen are out. Also, by the ends of games they’re getting so tired because they have no decent backups at this point. Then put a freshman QB back there and it’s basically hopeless. I’d argue that most any team wouldn’t be able to deal with the injury situation Mizzou is having. Also, our SOS is currently ranked #8 in the country.

And yet we still had a chance to win the game in the final minute. Got to Vandy’s 20 yard line. Needed a TD to win. Then they get three straight sacks of the QB. The line simply can’t pass protect.

So go ahead and dismiss Mizzou as a bust this year, but it’s bad luck more than anything. The same sort of thing happened to Tennessee last year. They had a ton of injuries and ended up going 5-7.

I did not realize they had that much attrition on the line and thought the issues were more based on Franklin. The combination of both would magnify the issue. Suspensions seem to go with the game. Georgia and Kentucky have some of the strictest policies in the entire SEC, which is why Mizzou did not get the full force from Georgia in that game. When I saw that Vandy vs Mizzou game I really felt bad for the Tiger QB getting hit almost every play.

What I said early on was Arkansas and South Carolina had some under .500 conference years before they could turn the corner with recruiting upgrades, facilities upgrades, and better understanding of playing in a conference year to year as compared to a school you play twice in a home and home or once in a bowl game. In time Mizzou should be able to adjust but it will not happen overnight.

The biggest thing will be how the schedules set up yearly after this transition year.

You just need 3 more for a bowl but I am guessing they will not come from Alabama or Florida. That leaves 4 games for 3 wins and the 2 tough ones will be on the road. Syracuse was in the game for all 3 of those losses and Kentucky may pick up a win or two when they play the lesser SEC teams. Anywhere between 6-6 and 3-9 looks possible.

If that’s the case, I have to agree that the PU fanbase has unrealistic expectations. PU under Hope hasn’t exactly set the world on fire, but he has a higher winning percentage than 3 of the 4 PU coaches before him (Joe Tiller, of course, did better), and all those guys got at least 4 years to prove their worth. Since 1970, only 2 of the 5 coaches at PU have done better than Hope. I’d understand it if they got rid of Hope if they have a losing season, but PU fans seem not to realize that they are who they are & that going through another rebuilding is a good way to challenge IU for a perpetual place in the B10 basement.

Bama is playing in Atlanta in 2013 & 2014, so I would assume it won’t be there. I guess it could go to St. Louis or maybe even Indianapolis, but those locations have taken part yet in the “kickoff” games. If I were a betting man, I’d bet that ole Jerry will do all he can to get the game in Arlington, but that is just a guess.

Bucky does recruit in TX a lot (almost exclusively in the 2 big metropolitan areas).

The Metroplex certainly has more football talent than StL or Indy. Another possibility is a game in FL. That would be pretty close for ‘Bama fans. Bucky also recruits in FL a lot, and (this may give one of the FL cities the nod over JerryWorld) they have more fans down there than in TX thanks to WI snowbirds retiring in the Sunshine State.

It’ll be interesting to see how many stadiums/cities/groups follow the Chick-fil-a folks & Jerry in pulling together these high profile kickoff games. They seem to have been pretty successful so far, and teams seem to be able to make enough money off of them to justify doing them. I know Coach Saban likes doing them. It gives him something to push the team towards during summer practice. Plus ever since we played in the first two Chick-fil-a games, Saban has been pulling a lot of kids out of Georgia. I think Saban would love to have one in the state of Florida also, since that is probably his 3rd biggest recruiting state behind AL & GA.

The Badgers really no longer recruit Texas. Stopped about 2-3 years ago. Would be nice to get back in but none of the new coaches have connections in Texas. The Badgers do recruit in Florida quite a bit. Location will be interesting. But as a Badger fan I am not going to excited until the ink is dry.

Even more reason to be suspicious of TV numbers. Mandel says a full million people less watched UT/WV than did NU/OSU according to Nielson. The good for Nebraska, this is their third game with over 4 Million viewers. The bad for Nebraska, they lost two of them badly (or Gangnam style).

Odds are one was using overnights which are taken from the ~56 metered markets and then extrapolated to estimate the national result. The other may have been using final numbers. There is also the chance of a typo.

One thing to consider-South Carolina scored in 5 plays, intercepted a pass and immediately scored and then returned a punt for a TD. I had that game on in another room while I was watching UT. The first time I checked, SC had just run the punt back and it was 21-0 early in the 1st quarter. My spouse was mercifully out and didn’t see any of the start. After that I hardly switched back. And basically nothing happened for 2.5 quarters. S. Carolina got a TD late in the 3rd and both got late TDs. UGA was flat and out of it after that start. I imagine they lost a lot of viewers quickly.

Brian, was Vanderbilt a 1 off, or is there an implied return once the SEC gets past this season and settles on their long term scheduling? If it is at Columbus it will be a BTN game and this project X thing will want inventory in Nashville.

I’m pretty sure it’s a ‘buy’ game. At the beginning of this season, Vandy’s AD said in an article they were interested in hosting another Thursday night week 1 SEC game next year, and that he wouldn’t regret canceling that OSU game if it happened.

Titans are in Nashville was what I was thinking if it went home and home they would move the game there. Big city and probably B1G and SEC living alumni around that would turn up for something like that. Indy to Nashville is a straight drive and Louisville is midway between them and other decent sized cities are close drive. Based on drive I am surprised Indiana has only played Vanderbilt twice.

If it was a single buy what did it cost the Buckeyes? If the lower FBS schools are getting close to the 1 million range Vanderbilt might have been cheap by comparison.

The 6-1-1 format was announced awhile back. Several sites, however have reported that an eventual 9 game schedule is likely.

Everything else they say mostly follows from the 6-1-1 format.

-If the conference is planning on sticking to an 8 game schedule for the long term, it becomes important for all permanent rivalries to schedule every team in the East home 1 year, then every team in the West home the next year. Therefore, if they announce a schedule that doesn’t follow this, it will be an indication they are likely planning a move to a 9 game schedule later.

-I wouldn’t be surprised if more than one school flips some home/away series for divisional opponents. This would be a good opportunity for some schools to balance their even/odd year home schedules. Having some permanent rivalries flipping will probably unbalance some current schedules.

That article is credible. I’ve read elsewhere where they were saying a lot of the same things. The SEC will try their best to stick with the 6-1-1 format. The upcoming SEC Network is the only thing that might be able to force their hand. Once the SEC Network is fully negotiated we’ll know for sure, but a lot of the SEC coaches and ADs (outside of Coach Saban) want nothing to do with a 9 game conference schedule. UGA, UF, USCe, and UK will probably fight tooth and nail to keep the 8 game schedule.

I’ll spare you the details, but it would likely be 2020 before any of the 2013 rotating opponents meet again, and 2025 before they return to the site of next year’s games.

Was the part that caught my eye.

I was thinking it would stay 8 game to protect the 4 east schools and the OOC for the west ones. What I was more curious about was the more intricate issues they are dealing with going forward as it might hint where the new schools may fall long term about scheduling old foes. It was also interesting to read about the east and west rotation part. It makes sense but

Missouri putting Kansas back and playing it in the final week or as a season opener comes to mind easiest, but Missouri vs old Big 8 (including Nebraska and Colorado) possible long term scheduling was more interesting. If Missouri becomes a double scheduler in the OOC on a standard basis and uses 1 slot for old Big 8 schools they could integrate their history with their future.

Missouri has said they’re willing to schedule Kansas, but Kansas has shown no inclination to do so. There was an article the other day where their basketball coach said (I’m paraphrasing): ‘The Longhorns aren’t scheduling A&M, so why should we schedule Missouri?’

To be fair, KU has 9 B12 games to MO’s 8 in the SEC. I still think they should play the game, maybe annually in KC, but KU does get the short end of that deal. I think KU is mostly pouting right now, but may change their minds in the future.

FSU-Florida
Clemson-South Carolina
Wake-Vandy
NC State-Maryland (at least sometimes)
Syracuse-Boston College (in all likelihood)
Miami-Whoever
GT-Georgia
Duke-UNC
UVA-VT
Pitt-Whoever (Miami? Should definitely be WVU. Neither school can begrudge the other for leaving their formerly shared conference, as with KU-Mizzou or UT-A&M, because BOTH of them left the Big East.)

If it was up to me, I would keep most of these games but change to these matchups, regardless of divisional alignment:

Miami-Whoever
Wake-Duke
UNC-NC State (They’re each other’s biggest rival in the sport of football. Duke-UNC matters a ton in basketball, but draws very little interest whatsoever in football.)
Maryland-Whoever
Pitt-WVU

The rest should rotate around.
PSU-MSU use to be permanent. Now they are a non-annual matchup in opposite divisions (though they still get to play for the ugliest bowling trophy ever devised).
Wisconsin-Minny & Northwestern-Illinois are definitely trophy rivalry games.

It’s the last game in 2012, so it’s at least 5 years in a row. The 2011 schedule was rushed with the NE addition, so I discount it. Years before NE joined mean nothing to scheduling in the 12 team era.

The B10 prefers to have rivalries as the last game, thus OSU/MI, IN/PU, IL/NW and IA/NE. That leaves MSU, MN, PSU and WI. There has to be a second crossover game to balance OSU/MI, and IL/NW fits the bill on both counts. And they of course prefer division games so they pair MSU/MN and PSU/NE (with hopes this will become a rivalry).

Rationalize all you like (since I seriously doubt that you actually have some inside knowledge of the workings of the B10 office that I don’t have), but I’m not going to throw away all knowledge of the B10 office’s historical scheduling tendencies just because you’ve declared that nothing in the past is relevant any more (“this time is different!”, said the house flippers a few years back and the dot-commers before them, etc.).

“I’m not going to throw away all knowledge of the B10 office’s historical scheduling tendencies just because you’ve declared that nothing in the past is relevant any more”

Facts:
1. There used to be 11 teams and no divisions
2. Now there are 12 teams and divisions

Those major changes impact scheduling decisions. There are now such things as crossover games, and they must come in pairs for the last week. In addition, crossover games in the final week are generally to be avoided to prevent CCG rematches in the next week. Those constraints did not exist for schedules predating 2011, so looking back at old schedules makes no sense.

2010: OSU/MI, IN/PU, IA/MN, PSU/MSU, WI/NW, IL/bye

That would be 3 crossover games, IL playing an impossible option, and 2 divisional rivalries. Call it 4 crossover games (assuming bye=NE), which isn’t much better.

2009: same
2008: IL and WI swap opponents

All the same objections apply.

NW/IL was in late November from 1999-2010, too, so it’s not a new phenomenon.

More facts:
3. B10 schedules with 12 teams exists for 2011-2016. In the last 5 of those, IL/NW is in the last week.
4. The B10 were rushed to release the 2011 schedule since they had only a few months to set it. They prefer to release them years in advance as shown by the 2011 and 2012 schedules coming out the same day, and the schedules through 2016 now being out.
5. The 2011 schedule included several unfortunate things like back to back home games in some series and the extension of the breaks in certain series.
6. Less desirable final games included IL/MN and MSU/NW.
7. By 2012, that issue was fixed, with IL/NW and MSU/MN being the final games instead.
8. The B10 continued that trend for the next 4 years as well, indicating they prefer it to other options.

Clearly the B10 likes to have rivalries in the last week based on their scheduling of the other rivalries. IL/NW is a state battle and a crossover game, making it ideally suited to be played the last week to balance OSU/MI. That leaves MSU/MN as the odd game out since there are 4 other rivalry-type games.

Feel free to think nothing has changed, It’s no more ridiculous than many of your other opinions.

The reason I don’t consider it for the last week is that PSU and WI both need a top level opponent for the last week to be on par with the other top teams. OSU/MI, NE/IA, PSU/WI. It works. Yes, that leaves MSU who is better than IA now, but NE/IA makes too much sense geographically to split up. There isn’t a good match for MSU anyway.

The ACC and Madison Square Gardens were seriously talking about playing the ACC tourney there, but it didn’t work out. The basic problem seems to be that MSG needs an annual event (the BE tourney deal is up for renewal) and the ACC just wants to be there occasionally. The ACC tourney will continue to rotate through various southern sites.

It’s looking like there may not be the needed 70 bowl-eligible teams by the usual rules this year with many teams having disappointing years and at least 3 ineligible teams (OSU, PSU, UNC; UCF is appealing). Luckily, the NCAA passed their new eligibility rules for just such an occasion this year.

After taking all the eligible teams 6-6 or better with 1 or fewer I-AA wins, the extra teams would come in this order:

1. Teams that finished 6-6, but had a win over an unqualified I-AA school.

2. Teams that finished 6-6, but have two wins over I-AA schools.
This year, Cincinnati, Florida State, Pittsburgh and Texas A&M have two I-AA teams on their schedules.

3. Teams that finish 6-7 with a loss in a conference championship game.

4. Teams that finished 6-7 in a regular, 13-game schedule.

Hawaii and any team that plays at Hawaii are allowed to play 13 regular season games. This year, New Mexico, South Alabama and UNLV are the only teams to schedule 13 games.

5. Teams that are in the process of reclassifying to I-A and finish 6-6.

This year, Massachusetts, South Alabama, Texas State and Texas-San Antonio fit in this group, however UTSA is not eligible due to not playing a FBS-qualified schedule.

6. Teams that finish 5-7 that rank in the top 5 of the APR.

The top five APR teams this season are Northwestern, Duke, Boise State, Ohio St (not eligible for other reasons) and Northern Illinois.

Notes:
1. You can only count wins over I-AAs that use their full allotment of 63 scholarships. Some of them use fewer (more like 50), so they wouldn’t normally count. I don’t think anyone qualifies under this rule, but I may be wrong.

2. UC, FSU and TAMU should all get to 7 wins anyway. Pitt lost to 1 of their I-AAs so they don’t fit this rule any more.

3. This could apply to the B10 or CUSA this year.

4. HI, USA and UNLV won’t win 6. NM might get to 6 (3-3 now).

5. None of those teams will win 6, I don’t think.

6. NW, Duke and NIU all have 5 wins now and Boise is at 4 wins. All of them should get to 6 wins. Duke has the toughest path, but they still have VT, UNC and GT.

More from Palm’s post:

“A bowl can only take a team out of the emergency pool once every four years.”

It would seem like the same few bowls every time would be at risk if less than 70 teams are eligible. Maybe they’ll rotate who gets an extra team? Otherwise bowls could be in trouble with OR and Miami potentially becoming ineligible.

“You would think that adding six pools of teams would help ensure full bowl games, but not necessarily. I only needed to fill one spot, but Texas A&M was the only team that met any of these six criteria in mypreseason projections. There’s a chance the NCAA will be scrambling again as November rolls around.”

It looks like these 6 pools will only provide 1-3 teams at most. They could easily yield nothing.

There are currently 34 teams 2+ games below 0.500, plus 4 ineligible teams (all 4 look likely to get to 6+ wins, too). That leaves 86 options for 70 spots. 11 teams are 1 game under 0.500 and 17 are at 0.500 right now. As conference play continues, can enough teams win 3 more games?

“More proof they need to up eligibility to 8 wins in the regular season”

I’d say that first they need to slash the number of bowls. Then they should eliminate the double tie-in from all but the top level bowls and only let the bowls lock in one conference. The open spots are filled based on record, geography and how long since each team/conference has been to a bowl/that bowl. No conference may have more tie-ins than 33% of their total membership. Finally they should increase the eligibility requirements to 8 games (I’d even settle for 7 with no I-AAs).

The playoffs will steal 4 teams. The NCS bowls will steal 8-10 more. Let another 8 bowls or so have double tie-ins, then all the others just 1.

I would love if they would kill off the excess bowls. I could live with 7 seven wins at least until you got a feel for how it works out, but I would still like 8 as a long term goal. I would actually say heck with the tie in except for maybe Rose – B1G and PAC, Sugar – SEC, Orange – ACC, Cotton (with Fiesta getting bumped down) – B12. The problem seems to arise as nobody travels like the B1G and SEC. To me the biggest issue is to pair as close as possible so you get close matches based on final standings :

The question is this “champions bowl” because I though part of the deal required the B12 to have 12 teams and a CCG yet they do not seem to be heading that way. They were saying on CBS today about a 1 loss B12 team not having a shot because they do not have a CCG and they made a point about this issue with the B1G in the past. Right or wrong others seem to be raising the same issues I have on here. B12 imploded on the national stage today.

Texas St. (Franchione’s team) is currently 2-3 with a blowout win over Houston. 6-6 is most definitely a possibility for them considering that they still have to play Idaho, Navy, UTSA, and New Mexico St. (as well as SJSU and Utah St.).

“Texas St. (Franchione’s team) is currently 2-3 with a blowout win over Houston. 6-6 is most definitely a possibility for them considering that they still have to play Idaho, Navy, UTSA, and New Mexico St. (as well as SJSU and Utah St.).”

TSU blew out UH but got blown out by NM.

Idaho and NMSU are likely wins, sure. That’s 4.

SJSU is 4-1
USU is 4-2 with a win over AQ Utah and close losses to WI and BYU
LT is 5-0 and top 25 right now
Navy is 2-3 and always a tough game
UTSA is 5-0 but haven’t really played anybody

Based on their schedule (Idaho, bye, SJSU, USU, LT), they are likely to be 3-6 in mid-November. They’ll have to win out @Navy, @UTSA and vs NMSU.

They’d have to win 1 against the trio of SJSU/USU/Navy (and, obviously, beat Idaho, UTSA, and NMSU. Definitely doable.

New Mexico’s only losses this year are to Texas, TTech, and (barely) to Boise, so a team could lose to UNM@UNM even by blowout & still be good enough to get 4 wins from the non-murderer’s row of Idaho/SJSU/USU/Navy/UTSA/NMSU.

We just disagree on how good SJSU, USU and Navy are, I think. SJSU pushed Stanford in their only loss. USU has some solid results, too. Navy looked pretty solid against CMU tonight, too. TSU will be an underdog against all 3 of those teams, plus LT. I have no idea how good UTSA is, but the game is at UTSA.

TSU is 2-3 now.

Take a loss to LT as a given, and they are 2-4.

Rough math:

Give them 90% odds of beating Idaho and NMSU, a 33% chance against SJSU, USU and Navy and call UTSA a toss up. The odds that they win 4+ are about 43%. You’d have to give them a 40% chance against those 3 to get to 50/50 odds.

The word out of WI is that they will be running the spread option some against PU with 3rd string QB Curt Phillips (yes, he of the 3 ACL injuries). Bielema liked how effective MI was with Denard, so they’ll try to replicate it with the wrong type of OL, little to no spread option experience, and an oft-injured QB that while mobile before his injuries was never a Denard-type runner.

I like the idea of sharing the game also, but it looks like that won’t happen.

I’m hoping that this statement was a typo or just misinformed: “The winning bidder would take the “Champions Bowl” name and likely enter the playoff semifinal rotation. BCS officials could involve up to seven sites to host playoff rounds during the 12-year span of the new contract.” Surely the winner will not continue to call the game the “Champions Bowl”, but replace it with either the Sugar or Cotton Bowl. The Champions Bowl sounds pretty pretentious IYAM (almost as pretentious as Leaders & Legends ;)).

Could be a week for surprises. 10 of the top 18 are on the road, 2 are at a neutral site and only 3 are at home (3 are off), with two of those at home playing other teams in the top 18. There is a Nick Saban quote to the media in the AJC today:
“There is a lot of parity in college football. The teams that most of you in this room make head and shoulders above other teams obviously showed you how badly you can be mistaken. This weekend kind of proved that your predictability is not very good. I think what it proved is that the only thing predictable about college football is that it’s unpredictable.”

It has been an ongoing debate for me since week 1 if we will see any B12 team face a serious defense. Since OU has played Kansas State and now will play Notre Dame I will at least get some sort of comparison between Kansas State, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and West Virginia int he next week or so.

jbcwv

The terps let Temple get 27 points and they are 117 out of 120 on turnover margin. That is usually not the sign of a solid defense.

I think this game highlights why you have to have at least a good defense to go through the season undefeated in the major BCS conferences. Eventually you’ll have a game where your offense just isn’t clicking for whatever reason, and you’ll need your defense to step up and keep you in games.

On “The U,” the ESPN 30 for30 documentary about the early 80’s to early 2000’s Miami Hurricanes, Jimmy Johnson said almost those exact words about their ’88 loss to ND in South Bend. His words then were as true as they are today.

Fox seems intent on turning SPEED into Fox Sports 1. They have lost F1, and NBC has picked it up, which may help Fox with their plans. It also helps NBC Sports as they get more racing to pair with IndyCar.

Interesting. ESPN exercised one of their 6 day windows to choose games for next weekend. Kickoff times and TV plans for NE/NW, PU/OSU and MSU/MI were still up in the air. The outcome:

12:00
PU @ OSU – ABC/ESPN2
MN @ WI – ESPNU

3:30
NE @ NW – ABC/ESPN2
MSU @ MI – BTN
IN @ Navy – CBS CS

8:00
PSU @ IA – BTN

Apparently the MSU loss killed their appeal, so ESPN passed on them (or else future game considerations made them pass now to get MI or MSU later). PU getting whipped and NW winning means NE/NW is more appealing than OSU/PU, so they slotted them as they did.

Best scheduler = everybody played about equal but the ACC had 4 teams OFF
Worst scheduler = IND had some non AQ’s due to conference play

.

Observations :
Northwestern is the first B1G bowl eligible team – the good
The other school in the state may be first to play their way out of a bowl – the bad
Iowa and Ohio State win but they were not pretty doing so – the ugly

# 4 Oklahoma – over rated in Top 5#12 Kansas State – win on the road in Snyder fashion and should be higher#13 TCU – over rated in Top 15#14 Texas Tech – has a defense in an offensive conference#16 Texas – over rated in Top 25, owned by Oklahoma in RRR#25 Oklahoma State – over rated in Top 25, squeaked by Kansas#26 West Virginia – owned by one of the better defenses in the conference#33 Iowa State – over rated by 15 – 30 spots#39 Baylor – dominated by TCU and over rated in Top 40Why are no B12 teams in the 40 to 90 range? Not 1 team in 50 spots!#92 Kansas

Sagarin has now stated his numbers are connected yet the following schools are below 90% of the B12 schools (Baylor is number 9 at #39) :

A conference with 90% Top 40 schools should be playing in the MNC every season! I find it offensive that Northwestern at 5-1 is above ONLY lowly Kansas in the B12. Vanderbilt in the B12 would be middle of the pack and more than just 8 ACC schools should be better than just Kansas in the B12. Kansas State beats Oklahoma @ Norman yet they are almost 10 spots behind the Sooners. Texas was exposed and should not even be in the Top 25 with their losses and weak wins.

Top 5 = Oklahoma when it should be Kansas State
Top 15 = Kansas State, TCU, Texas Tech when it should be Oklahoma
Top 25 = Texas and Oklahoma State when it should be Texas Tech

Again, I am confirming the B12 has some Top 25 teams but would point out that only half of the current Sagarin picks are worthy of Top 25 inclusion. Something like this seems more reasonable based on games played so far :

Yes, by all 3 measures (equally weighted, middle weighted more, median). But that’s not your problem. You don’t like where he has the teams rated. The conference ranking is just a by-product of that.

“# 4 Oklahoma – over rated in Top 5”

NO. NO, NO, NO. He rates them #2 when he uses MOV and #9 for BCS purposes. The ranking you’re using is a combination of the two, but not one of his standard rankings. If you’re going to bitch about his rankings, pick one of his two models and use that.

In this case, you seem to agree with his BCS ranking of #9. So let’s re-list the B12 by his BCS rankings:

“#12 Kansas State – win on the road in Snyder fashion and should be higher
#13 TCU – over rated in Top 15
#14 Texas Tech – has a defense in an offensive conference
#16 Texas – over rated in Top 25, owned by Oklahoma in RRR
#25 Oklahoma State – over rated in Top 25, squeaked by Kansas
#26 West Virginia – owned by one of the better defenses in the conference
#33 Iowa State – over rated by 15 – 30 spots
#39 Baylor – dominated by TCU and over rated in Top 40
#92 Kansas”

Almost all of your objections are answered simply by looking at his BCS rankings.

“Why are no B12 teams in the 40 to 90 range? Not 1 team in 50 spots!”

Because KU really sucks and the other teams are all pretty decent? Wouldn’t you have a huge gap in the rankings between Baylor and KU?

Speaking of which, if you are going to bitch so much about Sagarin’s rankings, where are yours? Why don’t you list every team in order so people can pick apart your rankings?

“Sagarin has now stated his numbers are connected yet the following schools are below 90% of the B12 schools (Baylor is number 9 at #39) :

What is your case for any of those teams deserving to be above Baylor? You can’t just bitch about a certain number of teams being below Baylor without an actual reason they shouldn’t be.

“A conference with 90% Top 40 schools should be playing in the MNC every season!”

That makes no logical sense. First, this is one season so it has no bearing on any other year. Second, being in the top 40 doesn’t mean you’re in the top 2.

“I find it offensive that Northwestern at 5-1 is above ONLY lowly Kansas in the B12.”

Why? Who has NW beaten that makes them deserving of a higher ranking?

“Again, I am confirming the B12 has some Top 25 teams but would point out that only half of the current Sagarin picks are worthy of Top 25 inclusion. Something like this seems more reasonable based on games played so far :

a) If AQ schools = 72, then they represent 58% of the124 total FBS schools
b) If non AQ schools = 52, then they represent 42% of the124 total FBS schools
c) If all conferences are not equal, then AQ dogs > non AQ dogs
d) 72 schools / 6 AQ conference’s = 12 schools per conference on average
e) Ties are not an option in college football so 1 winner = 1 loser
f) Weak OOC scheduling skews roughly 25% of a B12 team schedule
g) respectable loss may refer more to opponent quality than final score

Now, here is where the B12 schools might be ranked in a Top 72 or Top 124(if I were ranking them)

In the race to 6 wins and bowl eligibility too many B12 schools cut corners and padded their stats at the cost of quality wins. I am happy to give them average conference status but I think the 90% = Top 40 argument is all smoke and mirrors. TCU may be the touchstone of such a debate as they have what looks like an impressive record until you look deeper at the teams they played :

Game #1 – 0-6 Grambling State in the SWAC (FCS school) = cannon fodder
Game #2 – 1-5 @ Kansas = possibly worst of all 72 AQ schools
Game #3 – 2-5 Virginia = 1 extra point away from 1-6 (FCS would be only win)
Game #4 – 2-4 @ SMU = TCU played a close game against a bad team
Game #5 – 4-2 Iowa State = TCU loss
Game #6 – 3-2 @ Baylor = TCU win vs team just above Kansas

5-1 against that should be expected but it does not mean such a record is worthy of a Top 30 ranking. If the B12 was so great why did they just put 1 team in BCS bowls last year? For being this superior conference it was the ACC and B1G that got the “at large” bids over a second B12 team.

Feel free to give a top 100 showing us all the other teams that deserve to be above these teams.

“look at my response to m(Ag)”

No. It’s irrelevant. You decry where the B12 teams are ranked, but refuse to give a list of all the teams that deserve to be ranked above each of them. Give a top 100 list that shows where all these teams should be since you’re so sure everyone else is wrong. It’s easy to say others are wrong when you don’t have to provide an improved version.

Put up or shut up.

“Now, here is where the B12 schools might be ranked in a Top 72 or Top 124
(if I were ranking them)

It’s easy to say that, but show us all where everyone else fits in. You have 1 top 5 school, 2 in the top 15, etc. Who are the other 13 in the top 15? Who are the other 13 in the next 15? Who are the other 13 in the third 15? Who are the other 13 in the fourth 15? Who are the other 14 in the fifth 15?

I tired to do a Top 50 in the previous blog Frank put up when I removed each team name and conference affiliation. I took time and nobody responded except when the picked out their own team. Doing 50 was time consuming enough and I have now forgotten which team when with each data field. Frankly I am a little worn out and see not much point in doing twice the effort if nobody is going to try and view it as “blind” data. In short tho what you keep seeing as bias is just observation of statistical numbers in one group that do not seem to correspond to the actual data of games played. To simplify without doing 100 (or at that point 124) teams it is easier to look for norms based on a standard bell curve. Some modification should be weighted based or realistic observations of trends.

# 1 Some variance from the norm is to be expected but wild variance without supporting data is not. Say the AQ conferences have enough of a talent edge to allow a ratio to evolve that roughly fits the data involved. With 124 teams in the larger pool maybe every 11 AQ schools generates 1 non AQ at the top level and as you approach #124 the ratio reverses so by the end you may have 1 AQ and 11 non AQ. Something like this :

#2 Once the non AQ has been distilled you are left with how to divide the AQ schools based on a weighted measure on the total duration of the BCS MNC or the half life if you want it weighted to the more recent era. In order to give some weight I used the conference of the participant at the time. What is startling is the absence of the ACC in BE in the half life version.

While past performance is not a perfect indicator of future performance it does at least tend to establish a competitive advantage over time. If it did not, then why is the ability to handicap horses or count cards a proven advantage in making money at gambling. While the B12 may have had a slight competitive advantage over the other AQ schools is still was well behind the SEC. What is also clear is just how glaring the advantage is for AQ schools over non AQ schools at the highest levels.

.
…
.

Some variance should be expected from year to year based on the points above but an expected top 100 should look something like this :

Again, Saying the entirety of the historic bottom of the B12 are all Top 40 teams in the span of a single season seems a mathematical impossibility at best. The 3 win easy OOC shifts the B12 by 25% and it does it early enough to give bias among voters minds that the conference is stronger than it is. The only conference showing that much dominance to warrant such weighting is the SEC at this time and even they should not have 90% of their conference (12.6 or 13 teams) in the Top 40.

If you accept 90% B12 in the Top 40, do you equally accept 90% SEC in the Top 40?

.
…
.

Back to your point, my Top 30 may look something like this, with the rest of the 124 FBS schools fall along a pattern outlined above.

Top 5 (until they lose)
# 1 6-0 Notre Dame for playing the schedule they do (all AQ’s)
# 2 6-0 Florida for playing the tougher SEC schedule so far
# 3 6-0 Alabama for playing the most complete game (penalty for 2 non AQ’s)
# 4 6-0 Kansas State for playing a better schedule and winning
# 5 5-0 Oregon State for playing the tougher PAC schedule

Top 15 (until they lose)
# 6 6-1 Louisiana State for winning with defense and depleted roster
# 7 7-0 Ohio State for playing 7 games already and still being perfect
# 8 6-0 Oregon gets penalty for playing 3 poor OOC games
# 9 6-0 Rutgers, paired entry with UL, Top 10 till they lose
#10 6-0 Louisville, paired entry with RU, Top 10 till they lose
#11 6-1 South Carolina for already playing 5 conference games
#12 5-1 Southern Cal for only loss on the road to ranked team
#13 5-1 Arizona State played a solid schedule and only 4pts from undefeated
#14 5-1 Georgia here for now but shaky (like Florida State)
#15 4-1 Oklahoma might be higher but only played 5 games so far

Top 30 (need to show better wins)
#16 6-0 Mississippi State played poor OOC and has “meh” wins
#17 5-0 Cincinnati still needs to win and only has 5 games played
#18 5-1 Texas A&M beat Northwestern in bowl so here till loss or better wins
#19 6-1 Northwestern has 5 AQ wins and PSU loss was on the road
#20 5-1 Texas Tech was this far down just because weak OOC
#21 6-1 Florida State might be higher without the 2 FCS wins
#22 6-1 Nevada won on the road at Cal and could end 11-1 with BSU win
#23 5-1 La Tech is 2 points away from a perfect season
#24 5-1 Clemson might have been higher but Auburn win has lost glow
#25 4-2 Stanford has 2 losses on the road against respectable teams
#26 5-2 UCLA lost bad at Cal or would be higher
#27 5-2 UNC is 6 points from undefeated from 2 road games (UL was one)
#28 4-2 Michigan has only lost to Top 5 teams
#29 4-2 Penn State slow start cost dearly early
#30 5-1 West Virginia has a great offense but no defense

“I tired to do a Top 50 in the previous blog Frank put up when I removed each team name and conference affiliation. I took time and nobody responded except when the picked out their own team. Doing 50 was time consuming enough and I have now forgotten which team when with each data field. Frankly I am a little worn out and see not much point in doing twice the effort if nobody is going to try and view it as “blind” data.”

I remember that post. The problem is that you decided for everyone else what data could be considered. Most people prefer to have all the data available and then choose what data they feel is most important. I understand not wanting to taint the outcome with team names or conference affiliations, but that also means we can’t use our insight from watching the games themselves.

For example, you can describe a game as AQ1 beat AQ2. Things not mentioned:
location, weather, MOV, score, AQ2’s ranking, records for both teams, info about the other losses for AQ2, relevant injuries/suspensions/etc, any other noteworthy circumstances. If you instead say #7 ND beat #17 Stanford 20-13 at home on a controversial last second call, a whole lot more information becomes available. Even more to those who watched the game, or even other ND and/or Stanford games. People who want more details can look up a box score or their F/+ ranking or whatever else they want. When you choose for others what they may consider, they tend to not pay attention to you.

“In short tho what you keep seeing as bias is just observation of statistical numbers in one group that do not seem to correspond to the actual data of games played.”

To you, which is why we call it bias. You complain about the computer rankings which only use game data. It’s fine to disagree with their methodology, but unlike you the computers don’t know which teams are in which conference and they still put the B12 up top. They don’t separate conference games from OOC games, and at this point in the season those two sets are about equal in number of games. All the computers do is figure out which ranking set best explains the results so far. You seem to prefer to rank based on what a team has achieved, but I think that only works well at the top if anywhere.

The other issue we have is you seem to believe there must be a certain distribution of teams in the rankings. That only X% can be in the top 40 or whatever. We think that’s nonsense. The teams rank where they rank, and if that means some conference are skewed high or low, so be it.

“# 1 Some variance from the norm is to be expected but wild variance without supporting data is not.”

Why is it expected to match the norm? What is the basis for that assumption?

“#2 Once the non AQ has been distilled you are left with how to divide the AQ schools based on a weighted measure on the total duration of the BCS MNC or the half life if you want it weighted to the more recent era.”

Again, this is where you lose us. Why on earth do we need a weighted measure of past performance to decide how good 2012 OSU is?

“While past performance is not a perfect indicator of future performance it does at least tend to establish a competitive advantage over time.”

Not really, especially with realignment. At best it may give you a rough trend of how good the top of a conference is. That doesn’t impact how good any one team is in any given season, though.

“If it did not, then why is the ability to handicap horses or count cards a proven advantage in making money at gambling.”

Because the cards already played actually impact the remaining cards in blackjack. It only helps until that deck (actually multiple decks, but you know what I mean) is done being used. It doesn’t help with the first hand from a new deck. That’s your problem. You claim knowledge of hands from previous decks helps with the current deck and the rest of us know that it doesn’t. Knowing the previous roulette numbers does not improve your odds of winning on future spins, either.

“Some variance should be expected from year to year based on the points above but an expected top 100 should look something like this”

No, it shouldn’t. A time averaged top 100 might be expected to look like that, but not any given instantaneous top 100.

“Again, Saying the entirety of the historic bottom of the B12 are all Top 40 teams in the span of a single season seems a mathematical impossibility at best.”

No, it doesn’t. 12 < 40, therefore it's entirely possible. Your issue is probability, not possibility, and even extremely unlikely events occur frequently. Someone wins the lottery, people get hit by lightning, planes crash, etc. Being improbable is meaningless for an instantaneous outcome.

"If you accept 90% B12 in the Top 40, do you equally accept 90% SEC in the Top 40?"

If I think the teams deserve to be ranked there, then yes. 90% means nothing to me. Do 9 teams deserve to be in the top 40? Not usually. Do 9 B12 teams deserve to be in the top 40 right now? I don't know.

"Back to your point, my Top 30 may look something like this, with the rest of the 124 FBS schools fall along a pattern outlined above.

Top 5 (until they lose)
# 1 6-0 Notre Dame for playing the schedule they do (all AQ’s)
# 2 6-0 Florida for playing the tougher SEC schedule so far
# 3 6-0 Alabama for playing the most complete game (penalty for 2 non AQ’s)
# 4 6-0 Kansas State for playing a better schedule and winning
# 5 5-0 Oregon State for playing the tougher PAC schedule

Top 15 (until they lose)
# 6 6-1 Louisiana State for winning with defense and depleted roster
# 7 7-0 Ohio State for playing 7 games already and still being perfect
# 8 6-0 Oregon gets penalty for playing 3 poor OOC games
# 9 6-0 Rutgers, paired entry with UL, Top 10 till they lose
#10 6-0 Louisville, paired entry with RU, Top 10 till they lose
#11 6-1 South Carolina for already playing 5 conference games
#12 5-1 Southern Cal for only loss on the road to ranked team
#13 5-1 Arizona State played a solid schedule and only 4pts from undefeated
#14 5-1 Georgia here for now but shaky (like Florida State)
#15 4-1 Oklahoma might be higher but only played 5 games so far

Top 30 (need to show better wins)
#16 6-0 Mississippi State played poor OOC and has “meh” wins
#17 5-0 Cincinnati still needs to win and only has 5 games played
#18 5-1 Texas A&M beat Northwestern in bowl so here till loss or better wins
#19 6-1 Northwestern has 5 AQ wins and PSU loss was on the road
#20 5-1 Texas Tech was this far down just because weak OOC
#21 6-1 Florida State might be higher without the 2 FCS wins
#22 6-1 Nevada won on the road at Cal and could end 11-1 with BSU win
#23 5-1 La Tech is 2 points away from a perfect season
#24 5-1 Clemson might have been higher but Auburn win has lost glow
#25 4-2 Stanford has 2 losses on the road against respectable teams
#26 5-2 UCLA lost bad at Cal or would be higher
#27 5-2 UNC is 6 points from undefeated from 2 road games (UL was one)
#28 4-2 Michigan has only lost to Top 5 teams
#29 4-2 Penn State slow start cost dearly early
#30 5-1 West Virginia has a great offense but no defense"

That gives a basis for discussion. People don't all need to agree on who the best teams are, but at least this way you've shown who you think should displace the other B12 teams. That's a huge amount of progress.

The problem is that you decided for everyone else what data could be considered. Most people prefer to have all the data available and then choose what data they feel is most important. I understand not wanting to taint the outcome with team names or conference affiliations, but that also means we can’t use our insight from watching the games themselves.

I was trying to distill it to how voters may view it in terms of W and L’s. I agree that we may view it differently by actually watching games but pollsters seem to see wins and “brand” names. Northwestern was in that bind as they historically are not great in football so winning did not register in the polls. They moved slower playing better teams than “brand” schools did by playing worse. The other issue is how to keep data limited to fit on a single line for each team. It would be interesting if there was a web site that did a better job of blind teams to see how folks would view them without team or conference bias.

.

The other issue we have is you seem to believe there must be a certain distribution of teams in the rankings. That only X% can be in the top 40 or whatever. We think that’s nonsense. The teams rank where they rank, and if that means some conference are skewed high or low, so be it.

I do not what to give the impression I think this is absolute and I do think there can be skewed groups as the SEC seems to do. The issue to me is when it seems well beyond such numbers with no supporting data. It is like when you ask random people on the street about the current population of the US and you get responses between 30 million and 3 billion. Common sense tells you some state populations are closer to the former while the entire global population is closer to the latter. That 90% in the Top 40 strikes me the same way. It is possible but the probability suggests error without an underlying explanation.

If the B12 had gone 28 – 2 OOC with each B12 team playing at least 2 AQ schools in the 3 games AND winning a game per school OOC against a Top 30 type opponent then you could point to that as the reason. I could see this as well if Kansas State had demolished Arkansas in their bowl game the way West Virginia destroyed Clemson. If the B12 had played a more “average” OOC last season or their other bowl games were like for like I could see this as a source of above average numbers. The problem is none of this has happened but the conference is perceived as tho this has occurred.

I still believe the B1G has solid teams and it continues to be one of the better college football conferences. They still appear to be able to stop opponents and they play enough schools in the AQ world to justify that they still produce teams that can makes runs for MNC’s. Just as I find 7 B12 schools in the first BCS I find it hard to accept 0 B1G schools. Ohio State and Penn State may not be eligible but at least 1 or 2 other B1G teams should be in the Top 25 debate. The problem is when the B12 gets 7 spots it takes that 3rd or 4th (behind say Ohio State and Penn State) spots away from the B1G or PAC and in the public mind perception becomes reality.

.

It’s fine to disagree with their methodology, but unlike you the computers don’t know which teams are in which conference and they still put the B12 up top. They don’t separate conference games from OOC games, and at this point in the season those two sets are about equal in number of games. All the computers do is figure out which ranking set best explains the results so far.

The old adage of “garbage in = garbage out” applies to computer results. You are correct in that a computer is only a processor but someone should read the output and consider tweaking algorithms if the data gets way out of whack which is why I bring it up. In the preseason Alabama was #2 and played Michigan which meant after week 1 Michigan should have had the #1 or #2 spot for SoS and they were like 35 while the 10 schools in the B12 were in the Top 10 or Top 15. If SoS is based on games actually played then the issue is not my bias, but the bias inherent in the software design that allows such an divergence.

.

Why is it expected to match the norm? What is the basis for that assumption?

Science and religion both seem to agree that things are born, they exist, then die.🙂

On a micro level of college football over longer periods of time certain life forms (in this case specific teams) will evolve and adapt so that a few will wind up with an unequal level of resources to ensure a competitive advantage.

.

That’s your problem. You claim knowledge of hands from previous decks helps with the current deck and the rest of us know that it doesn’t. Knowing the previous roulette numbers does not improve your odds of winning on future spins, either.

Lets stay away from inanimate objects and focus just on organic life forms. Gambling on horses is pari mutual where you are competing against other bettors and not the house. while past performance is not the end all and be all of a current race the previous data can offer insight on a competitive edge. Some folks make a living at the track so it has to be more than just luck or chance. The guys betting on luck / chance are the guys that wind up with gamblers anonymous. The same can be said for the market when it tanked in 2008. Most folks lost because they were gambling with things they failed to study. That money did not just disappear but transferred to a few folks who studied the past to know the future was different than what the majority believed. Like football, Wall Street is a zero sum game where you have a winner and a loser.

.

No, it shouldn’t. A time averaged top 100 might be expected to look like that, but not any given instantaneous top 100.

I think we are in agreement here but I have been plotting points week by week in a sense with a look around the AQ each week. It may be a basic but it “smooths” the data over the course of the season.

.

If I think the teams deserve to be ranked there, then yes. 90% means nothing to me. Do 9 teams deserve to be in the top 40? Not usually. Do 9 B12 teams deserve to be in the top 40 right now? I don’t know.

Fair enough, and I am not saying I have the correct answer either. I may differ from you tho in that I am curious to debate and question why such an anomaly occurs when it happens. While you may think this issue is just B12 related I can only offer that I would question any other conference with such a skewed set of results.

Actually, having 90% in the top 40 should not be a surprise. There are 60 teams in the Big 5 conferences right now. Add about 10 of ND, BYU and a few of the top miscellaneous and you’ve got 70 schools. Only a handful of the 60 Big 5 schools will be below 70. So the top 40 is 57% of that top group. The expected number of Big 12 teams in the top 40 would be 6 assuming all of the 5 conferences were equal. The ACC and Big 10 are not equal this year by just about any measure. The ACC is 13-14 vs. FBS competition this year, just barely ahead of the WAC. I don’t think the Pac 12 is at the Big 12/SEC level overall, but as Michael said, its hard to compare those 3 at this point.

While you might not put the Big East there, they have 3 undefeated teams in the Top 20. Just for arguments sake, add them to the 4 IND schools and you get a combined 12 teams

12 ACC + 10 B12 + 12 BE/IND + 12 B1G + 12 PAC + 14 SEC = 72 schools

12 CUSA + 13 MAC + 10 MWC + 10 Sun Belt + 7 WAC = 52 schools

Taking a few off the AQ’s but adding about 18 from the non AQ’s and you probably are looking more at 80 than 70 so the Top 40 would be 50% not 57%. If you multiply 10 by .5 you get 5. If you think Kansas is below 80 (as many seem to feel) you multiply 9 by .5 or 4.5.

The issue being the B12 has 87% winning percentage but they are playing and beating crappy schools to get it. FCS schools account for 35% of the wins, NAQ schools account for 46%, and AQ schools account for only 19% of the wins.

That means 9 of the ACC losses came to OOC AQ schools that are undefeated or have only 1 loss as compared to 0 B12 (wins or losses) to OOC AQ schools that are undefeated or have only 1 loss. It is safe to say the ACC had FBS losses but the quality was far superior to the B12 in OOC play. You are helping prove my point that the B12 has far more teams in the Top 40 than they should! If 5 (50%) are in the Top 40 and 5 (50%) should be in the Next 40! In light of the weak schedule you should expect maybe 3 (30%) or 4 (40%) in the Top 40.

“I was trying to distill it to how voters may view it in terms of W and L’s. I agree that we may view it differently by actually watching games but pollsters seem to see wins and “brand” names. Northwestern was in that bind as they historically are not great in football so winning did not register in the polls. They moved slower playing better teams than “brand” schools did by playing worse.”

Weer those teams better? How good is Syracuse, really? BC? Plenty of non-AQs are at least as good as them.

“The other issue is how to keep data limited to fit on a single line for each team. It would be interesting if there was a web site that did a better job of blind teams to see how folks would view them without team or conference bias.”

It is impossible to summarize data in a way that doesn’t upset somebody, and I do appreciate how much work that was to do for 50 teams. It would be interesting to see anonymous info. You can do some of that by making a spreadsheet of stats, I suppose. Then people can look for the data they find most important while seeing teams listed solely by random names, so no brand or conference issues. It’s not something that can readily be done in blog comments, but I suppose one could generate a Google document to share.

“I still believe the B1G has solid teams and it continues to be one of the better college football conferences.”

On average, sure, but you must admit this is a down year for the B10. OSU, PSU and WI all started really slowly before starting to improve. MI got embarrassed twice by elite teams. NE lost on the road to what was a bad team last year and has shown no defense all season. MSU had lofty expectations but has shown a less than mediocre offense. IA looked bad early and even lost to the MAC. IL is worse than the team that got the coach fired. PU has been whipped twice in conference. NW had several close call wins over iffy teams. MN and IN are improving, but nothing to brag about.

“They still appear to be able to stop opponents ”

OSU, NE, IN and IL have all struggled to stop anybody. NW, PU and MI have struggled to stop some teams. B10 defense hasn’t been elite this year/

“and they play enough schools in the AQ world to justify that they still produce teams that can makes runs for MNC’s.”

But not this year.

“Just as I find 7 B12 schools in the first BCS I find it hard to accept 0 B1G schools. Ohio State and Penn State may not be eligible but at least 1 or 2 other B1G teams should be in the Top 25 debate.”

As you note, OSU would be in the top 25. MI is certainly in the discussion as they’re #25 in one poll, #26 in the other and something similar in the computers. Beating MSU would get them in next week most likely. WI is starting to play better, but their slow start and soft schedule so far means they probably need 2 more wins to get in (MN, MSU -> 7-2). NE, NW and IA are in a similar position. MSU might need 3 more wins now. The point is, several B10 teams missed the BCS by a fairly small amount so they are in the discussion. The AP poll has B10 teams at 7, 23, 31, 33, 34 and 37 for example. Have they all proven they deserve to be in the top 25 so far? Probably not, but they aren’t far away.

“The old adage of “garbage in = garbage out” applies to computer results. You are correct in that a computer is only a processor but someone should read the output and consider tweaking algorithms if the data gets way out of whack which is why I bring it up.”

Their output usually isn’t intended to be fully accurate until the end of the year. More data improves their results. That said, plenty of people check their results. Sagarin’s been working on his since the 80s, for example. Most of these guys go back and tweak their formulas to see if any change will increase overall accuracy, especially if their model is intended to be predictive.

“In the preseason Alabama was #2 and played Michigan which meant after week 1 Michigan should have had the #1 or #2 spot for SoS and they were like 35 while the 10 schools in the B12 were in the Top 10 or Top 15. If SoS is based on games actually played then the issue is not my bias, but the bias inherent in the software design that allows such an divergence.”

I believe Sagarin’s SOS is based solely on games already played, but it’s not as simple as you make it sound. He considers game location highly, so AL/MI being neutral site means neither would get #1 SOS. I don’t know exactly how he computes SOS, though, so I can’t explain his results. I do know that 1 game is a very small data set and you are setting a very high bar to expect accurate results after 1 week.

“Lets stay away from inanimate objects and focus just on organic life forms. Gambling on horses is pari mutual where you are competing against other bettors and not the house. while past performance is not the end all and be all of a current race the previous data can offer insight on a competitive edge. Some folks make a living at the track so it has to be more than just luck or chance.”

Yes, but you’re talking about betting on the same horse each time. The better parallel for what you’re doing in CFB would be using the results of the sire and dam to predict the race results for the child. They are related, but not the same.

“Like football, Wall Street is a zero sum game where you have a winner and a loser.”

@Duffman
The Big 12 is 17-3-85% against FBS competition. As you point out, 3 of those wins are against ACC schools.

The ACC is 13-14 against FBS competition. And with 13 games against FCS, they have played more than any other conference so far. Big 12 and Big East have 9, Pac 12, Big 12 and SEC 8 (but with some still remaining). The MWC also has 9 and the MAC has 11. The other conferences have less.

Just because you play good teams doesn’t mean you are good. So far, Miami and Maryland, who both lost to Big 12 schools, lead their divisions in the ACC. Miami lost 52-13 to Kansas St. which is similar in score to KSU’s wins over Kansas (56-16) and Missouri St. (51-9). KSU’s other 3 games were much closer. And, for this week anyway, Iowa, who lost to a Big 12 school is leading its division in the Big 10.

Top 5 (until they lose)
# 1 6-0 Notre Dame for playing the schedule they do (all AQ’s)
# 2 6-0 Florida for playing the tougher SEC schedule so far
# 3 6-0 Alabama for playing the most complete game (penalty for 2 non AQ’s)
# 4 6-0 Kansas State for playing a better schedule and winning
# 5 5-0 Oregon State for playing the tougher PAC schedule

Top 15 (until they lose)
# 6 6-1 Louisiana State for winning with defense and depleted roster
# 7 7-0 Ohio State for playing 7 games already and still being perfect
# 8 6-0 Oregon gets penalty for playing 3 poor OOC games
# 9 6-0 Rutgers, paired entry with UL, Top 10 till they lose
#10 6-0 Louisville, paired entry with RU, Top 10 till they lose
#11 6-1 South Carolina for already playing 5 conference games
#12 5-1 Southern Cal for only loss on the road to ranked team
#13 5-1 Arizona State played a solid schedule and only 4pts from undefeated
#14 5-1 Georgia here for now but shaky (like Florida State)
#15 4-1 Oklahoma might be higher but only played 5 games so far

Regarding your top 15, other than the BE schools I can’t quibble with the rankings based on your philosophy. Now IMO Notre Dame’s schedule doesn’t make up for failing to dominate weaker teams. And Oregon’s schedule is made up for by dominating the 2 solid teams they have played, who may be better than anyone ND has played other than Stanford. OU has crushed UT and TT and lost close to KSU.

As for the BE schools, Rutgers hasn’t played anyone with a winning record and hasn’t won easily against any of them. UL hasn’t beaten anyone with a winning record other than UNC and hasn’t dominated anyone except FCS schools. And your #17 Cincy has only 4-3 Virginia Tech with a winning record and 2 FCS wins. I don’t think Cincy or Rutgers is ranked at the end of the year. Your comments about your #16 Mississippi State apply doubly to those 3 BE schools.

If I were to rank teams based on where I think they should end up, Oregon St. and MS St. I would put in the 20s. ND and tOSU would be 7 or 8 spots lower, while the rest would only have minor movement. But at this point, the unbeatens who have at least beaten someone, deserve the ranking. IMO Results on the field should matter, not just an eyeball test. Now UL, UC and Rutgers I would put in a top 25 because they haven’t lost, but I don’t think UC and Rutgers are even in the top 30 programs. UC may face its 2nd toughest test of the season this week (after UL) when it plays Toledo. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Toledo win.

Ohio U. is the other unbeaten, but they beat UMass and Marshall by a FG and Bowling Green and Akron by a TD, so their win over PSU by 10 isn’t enough to get them ranked.

+ The B12 has played only 6 games against AQ schools
+ In those 6 games they are 5-1 or 83%
+ The AQ schools played are 2-5, 3-3, 4-2, 4-2, 4-3, 4-3

Sugar coat if you want, but you can not make a silk purse out of a sows ear

These are the facts :

– The B12 scheduled the fewest AQ games of the 6 AQ’s by a wide margin
– The AQ’s scheduled were not world beaters and none are ranked currently
– The entire B12 has not played 1 AQ opponent with 5 or more wins
– Notre Dame by itself scheduled ~2x the AQ’s of the entire B12 conference

Now overlay the entire B12 schedule with just Notre Dame
– both play 4-3 Miami
– OU plays ND so that is a wash
– Pittsburgh (ND) and Virginia (TCU) should finish below .500 for season
– Wake Forest (ND) and Arizona (OSU) have 4 probable losses left
– Purdue (ND) and Ole Miss (UT) have conference losses coming
– Michigan (ND) and Iowa (ISU) about wash each other out
– Michigan State (ND) and Maryland (WVU) about wash each other out

That leaves Notre Dame with a 5 school margin over the entire B12 1
ACC = 1-5 Boston College : not a contender
I ND = 3-3 Navy : could squeak a bowl but probably not
I ND = 4-3 BYU : 8-4 finish, a good bowl, and possible Top 25
PAC = 4-2 Stanford : 8-4 finish, a good bowl, and possible Top 25
PAC = 5-1 Southern Cal : 10+ finish, BCS bowl, and possible MNC run

To further illustrate the point, deduct all FCS schools and all AQ schools and concentrate on the NAQ games the B12 played ranked roughly by current rank in B12 :

The 6-1 games were Iowa State vs Tulsa and Kansas vs Northern Illinois

.
…
.

Just because you play good teams doesn’t mean you are good. So far, Miami and Maryland, who both lost to Big 12 schools, lead their divisions in the ACC. Miami lost 52-13 to Kansas St. which is similar in score to KSU’s wins over Kansas (56-16) and Missouri St. (51-9). KSU’s other 3 games were much closer. And, for this week anyway, Iowa, who lost to a Big 12 school is leading its division in the Big 10.

Put the shoe on the other foot! Just because you beat bad teams doesn’t mean you are good either.😉

Putting Notre Dame in the #1 spot was the ability to play defense which makes up for their lack of offense. I agree none of the Irish wins were blowouts but if you look at the past decade of BCS MNC winners, the majority were won with defensive play. The Texas vs Southern Cal game may be the lone offensive output game in the lot. If the Domers stay undefeated they beat a conference leader in the B1G via Michigan, the IND via BYU, the PAC via Southern Cal or Stanford, the B12 via Oklahoma, and the ACC if Miami finishes strong.

That is pretty impressive but so it Notre Dame being #2 in the country behind #1 Alabama in scoring defense. Rutgers is #3 and Cincinnati is #10. Notre Dame is also #10 in turnover margin. Rutgers is #1 and Kansas State is #7 on the list as well as some SEC schools. Not to sound like a total simpleton but if defense has been winning BCS MNC’s lately then I am looking for schools outside the SEC who do this and Notre Dame seems to be at the top of the list with a few Big East teams in the range.

We agree about the Big East tho which is why the (until they lose) note was in there. Obviously all 3 Big East teams will play each other and it should sort itself out but for now all have an argument for being where I ranked them. I watched parts of the Cincinnati vs Virginia Tech game and was impressed with their swarming defense. The QB is young and replacing Kolllaras (sp) who may have taken the Bearcats to the Big East championship before he was injured. Louisville is already in the rumor mill for Charlie Strong to go to Arkansas, Tennessee, or Auburn so that is an indication not to take the Cardinals lightly. Rutgers is the big question mark as while it is not an impressive resume, 3 of their first for games were wins on the road which is kinda impressive.

Mississippi State is at the point now where they are exposed as pretenders or real SEC contenders. If they keep close to Alabama and beat either LSU or TAMU they could end with 10 wins and that is not to shabby. They could also lose 5 of their last 6 games and limp into a bowl with a 7-5 record. Oklahoma should beat Kansas and Notre Dame has a 70 – 30 shot of beating BYU. That sets up a 7-0 Notre Dame @ 5-1 Oklahoma and the only B12 vs Top 25 AQ game. A close game probably does not hurt either but if one team dominates then the other should suffer in the polls. 1 loss ND or 2 loss OU is probably effectively out of the MNC discussion.

I am okay with you putting Oregon and Alabama in the top spots and by seasons end both have a high probability to be there. I just zinged both for some of their OOC games. I still think the sneaky pete in the bunch may be Arizona State. The Sun Devils should get 7 or 8 wins with Oregon State and Southern Cal on the road and Oregon at home left. 8 wins gets them to a good bowl and 10 wins may put them in a BCS bowl. It will not surprise me if the SEC is #1 by seasons ends with the PAC in the #2 spot in terms of overall conference strength. Ohio State is one of the first schools to 7 games so they get some credit for not taking a week off yet. They should beat Purdue and Illinois which gives them 9 wins. They have to travel to Penn State and Wisconsin who are both picking up after slow starts. The Michigan game is the Michigan game so it should be hard fought. I can see them easily finishing with 10+ wins which should put them in the Top 5 – Top 15 by seasons end.

The 5-1’s that may see seasons head south include TAMU, TCU, and Boise State (possible loss @ Nevada and SDSU which knocks them out of the Top 25) as their schedules stiffen. The 5-1’s that still have a shot to get a good bowl based on remaining schedules include Clemson, Texas Tech, West Virginia, Georgia, Western Kentucky, and La Tech. We will see as the season goes on but I would not be surprised to see two 1 loss Big East teams at the end.

I certainly agree OSU hasn’t consistently looked like a top 10 team. The record props them up for now, and they have shown a pretty good offense lately but only spurts of good D. They aren’t one of the 10 best teams right now, but their record may deserve a top 10 ranking.

We’ll get an idea of Arizona St. tomorrow night when they host Oregon. They could end up with 5 or 6 losses or run the table. The Missouri loss keeps looking worse, but Mizzou did have them at home and the injuries have mounted since then.

Mizzou beat ASU with their backup QB (the same one who played most of the Vandy game & all of the Alabama game). Not sure of their other injuries at the time, but they haven’t had a healthy O-line all season.

As noted above, Rutgers played 3 of their first 4 games on the road at a point in the schedule when most schools are playing in the friendly confines of home. the Scarlet Knights could be exposed in the next few games but for now they have paid some dues. I agree about the Cincinnati game as a test and a loss for the Bearcats. Wisconsin lost to undefeated Oregon State and Nebraska on the road by a combined 6 points. Not many schools had that kind of test early and certainly no B12 school accomplished either feat. Alabama has proven they can run the ball and play defense so they don’t need high scores to keep winning. Unlike the B12 even the Tide played a decent OOC AQ game. I am willing to cut Michigan some slack for playing 2 of the Top 5 teams in the country in their OOC schedule.

The problem with playing a bunch of weaker teams at home early is your team is set up for a steep fall when they go on the road for a big game and are unprepared. Early road wins impress me maybe more than it does others but it is hard to have the younger players prepared when they lack experience. Rutgers @ Arkansas is probably the only game they will play in front of 70,000+ (72,543) hostile fans. In 2011 the biggest road crowd was 53,000, 50,000 in 2010, and 44,000 in 2009. I am guessing the Rutgers folks were just as happy leaving Fayetteville with a win as they were with getting out of the Ozark’s.

AP voters clearly didn’t watch the OSU game. That’s the only explanation for OSU moving up a spot in the poll. I was really surprised that SC dropped below OSU for a close loss at LSU. OrSU really closed the gap on OSU, though.

Again, the pollsters show their love of their preseason predictions. S. Carolina falls 3 spaces behind LSU with the same record and a 2 point loss on the road. Maybe they are anticipating a loss next week. If S. Carolina loses at Florida, the Georgia-Florida winner is in the driver’s seat in the east.

These last 2 years seem to have a lot of teams with flaws. Its hard to pick 25 teams who really seem like they belong in the top 25. But its all relative.

While brian seems to feel each season is independent I tend to believe much of the early voter love was tied directly to the 70 point win in a bowl the previous winter. While the Big East has 3 undefeated teams at this point to the lone one in the B12 they are still perceived as lower because of previous seasons and a lower opinion in the AQ college football world.

Kansas State was #2 in the B12 and went 10-3 and a date with the Cotton Bowl. They still started in the polls at #22 and #23 respectively. They were behind :

I think La Tech would have had an unbeaten season if they got A&M the 1st week instead of having the game delayed. A&M has improved week by week and they weren’t overlooking La Tech after their wins over UVA and Illinois. They shut them out for 1.5 quarters before La Tech got the 57 points in the last 2.5. The difference was extra points. A&M blocked an extra point in the 2nd quarter and ran it back for 2. La Tech was 1 for 3 in 2 point conversions in the 4th Q, including missing one with 16 seconds left, so 59-57. One writer was complaining about the game being 4:28 long and ending way after 1 a.m.

I tend to agree with that. TAMU vs La Tech looked like 2 schools with weaker defensive teams. Folks in College Station get a visit from Alan’s Tigers and those 7 touchdowns may be reduced to just 2 or 3. The interesting stat was that in all that offense the folks at La Tech did not turn the ball over once.

Coming into the season, A&M was pretty confident in the defensive front 7, but worried about depth there. The secondary was a very young question mark.

Early on, the linemen and linebackers dominated Tech. You could tell they were very familiar with ‘Air Raid’ plays as they snuffed out play after play. As the game went on, however, they just seemed worn down by the sheer number of plays that were being run in the game, and Tech’s QB had time to work the offense. He mostly did this throwing to 1 receiver that A&M was unable to cover, though they rotated seemingly every defensive back they have to cover him. This also resulted in an absurd number of defensive penalties, most of which were earned.

The game still wasn’t close until A&M threw a pick 6 and later failed to recover an onside kick by Tech.

The LSU match-up is completely different. They’ll try to wear down the defense, but in a completely different fashion than Tech. And they seem completely unsuited to attack the secondary.

You want lots of high profile conference games and to preserve as many rivalries as possible, but you are constrained by an 8 or 9 game limit and the desire to avoid rematches in the CCG.

Solution methods

1. Think outside of the box

For whatever reason, TPTB in the big conferences really restrict themselves to only the most mainstream choices. For example, they feel the need to treat all the teams the exact same, which often makes sense but doesn’t always for scheduling. They also eschew things like pod scheduling which would reduce one of the downsides of expansion, playing old foes less frequently.

2. Put facts ahead of emotions

TPTB also think they know how fans will react to certain things, so they make certain choices to avoid potential negative feedback. Instead, they should decide what is best for the league and tailor their decisions to that. Fans will come around if it’s good for the league. It also means they need to know the facts, however. I often get the feeling the fans have done deeper analysis on scheduling issues than TPTB.

Specifics for the B10

1. Not every team needs the same number of locked rivals. Lock the most important games and don’t force other rivalries to be locked.

For comparison, the current plan is 100% A; 40% B, C, D, E, F for everybody.

This preserves a major rivalry (WI/IA) at fairly low cost to everyone else while not trying to force rivalries that don’t exist (PU/IA, IN/MSU). There will be a few oddities, like an unequal number of home and away games in some series in the short term, but it balances out over time. Other than WI and the faux rivalries, everyone would see teams from the other division at least as much if not more. I think every school benefits from this.

2. Eliminate rematches from the CCG

This is easy to do if the NCAA rules allow it. It’s a gray area to me since the rules simply say the game must be between division champions. There is no mention of how to determine division champions, however. Most leagues use total conference record, for example, but a team could have a better division record than the champ determined that way.

My plan is simple. The two normal champs play unless it’s a rematch. If it’s a rematch, the head to head winner stays and the other is replaced. This makes sure there is never a conference game that doesn’t count. You can write the rules to determine the champ to be the highest standing team that didn’t lose to the other division’s champ.

Last year, MSU vs WI was a rematch. Since MSU won, they’d stay and WI would have been replaced. In this case, PSU would have replaced WI which would have been a terrible game with the scandal in high gear. If WI had won the first game, though, then MSU would have been replaced by MI. That would have been a fun game and not a rematch that invalidated the earlier game. This won’t result in an equally good or better game most years, but it will be a new game. Depending how many good teams the conference has in a year, it may not hurt the game much. It certainly would increase the intrigue when top teams didn’t play during the season.

Based on size and recent success, this would work even better in the SEC.

The B12 rankings
– Kansas State won on the road and moved up #4 / #3
– Oklahoma beat Texas and got a +3 bump #10 / #7
– West Virginia got exposed and dropped around 11 to #17 / #15
– Texas Tech beat West Virginia and entered the rankings #18 / #20
– TCU played a meh Baylor and moved up 2 to #27 / #21
– Texas got exposed and dropped to #29 / #28
– Oklahoma State still got votes for squeaking past Kansas #NR / #33
– Iowa State still got votes for losing at home #NR / #35

The voters are starting to acknowledge the B12 is not the wonder conference. I still think 80% of a conference who played such a padded getting votes is bad at least it is starting to correct to a more realistic level. The AP seems more balanced and the USA poll still seems to favor the B12.

Yes, I still feel the B1G is not as bad as advertised to not warrant 1 team in the Top 25. In contrast I still feel the B12 is not as good as advertised and does not warrant 6 teams in the Top 25. At least the AP and USA dropped Texas from the Top 25 but Harris seems happy to let them hang around. Some teams that may deserve a spot in the Top 25 :

Northwestern 5-1 : lost to 4-2 Penn State, beat 3 AQ schools in the non conference
Michigan 4-2 : losses to #1 Alabama and #5 Notre Dame
Wisconsin 5-2 : two losses by a total of 6 points on the road to ranked teams
NC State 4-2 : beat #8 Florida State, lost on the road to Miami and Tennessee
UCLA 5-2 : lost to undefeated Oregon State and Cal on the road
Western Kentucky 5-1 : only loss was to #1 Alabama @ Alabama
La Tech 5-1 : only loss was by 2 points to a Top 20 team

“Yes, I still feel the B1G is not as bad as advertised to not warrant 1 team in the Top 25.”

MI hasn’t beaten anyone yet. UMass sucks, AF sucks, PU sucks, IL sucks. They got blown out by #1 and looked horrible against #5. We know they shouldn’t be top 10, but they’ve done nothing to show where they do belong. They’ll gain quickly if they win their next 2 games, vs MSU and @NE.

“At least the AP and USA dropped Texas from the Top 25 but Harris seems happy to let them hang around.”

It’s the first Harris poll, so TX isn’t hanging around. They chose to put them there in their first vote.

5-1 Arizona State beat N Arizona, Illinois, and lost a close game @ Missouri
vs
5-1 Texas Tech beat Northwestern State, Texas State, and New Mexico

Look, if the B12 was scheduling better in the OCC and picking up the wins I would be happy to go with it. Many times on here I have given Oklahoma credit for playing a tougher schedule than their fellow conference mates. While you may be correct on Northwestern at least they played 3 AQ schools when 3 or 4 B12 played not a single AQ school at all. To be fair I am not sure I would put Oregon at number 2 because 3 of their wins came against Arkansas State, Fresno State, and Tennessee Tech. I also question Mississippi State who did not play any AQ’s in their non conference schedule.

You shouldn’t look at the previous week’s poll to decide where to put a team this week. The Longhorn’s loss to WVU looks much less impressive this week. The victory over OKSU looks less impressive this week. The victory over Ole Miss does look more impressive this week.

If we’re looking for Big 12 teams to rank, Iowa State should be above several listed. Their 2 losses were competitive games against KSU and TT, the teams that should be #1 & #3 in the conference now. They have victories over TCU, Iowa, and Tulsa (who’s 6-0 since losing to ISU in week one).

My issue with Texas is if they want the brass ring they have to push for it early. No offense to m(Ag) but I am still not fully accepting of Mississippi of being better. Sure they are better than last year but when you are on the bottom anything is better. The bigger point is that Texas got into the month of October before getting their first test. So far they have failed both but they will have enough cushion wins to get them bowl eligible.

The point being is had Notre Dame been on the schedule in lieu of Mississippi and won, Texas would have dropped earlier (like Michigan did) but they would also be looking at a 6-6 season or a 5-7 one if things fell apart. Penn State and Michigan got off to rocky starts but now they are doing better in conference.

Texas wants to be treated like a MNC contender (the brass ring) but they are going to have to schedule better (which they are starting to do) and play MNC type defense instead of B12 type defense. I get they ran the score up on Mississippi but they still allowed them to score over 30 on the Longhorns. They get media love like a Top 25 team when they play and schedule like a Top 50 one. Scheduling 3 historic FBS cellar dwellers is not going to prepare you to play high end football. Oregon is doing the same thing and I hope the voters show them less love because of it. Mississippi State is doing it in the SEC but nobody expects them to have the MNC mentality yet and nobody has been quick to move them up week to week.

Basically a 4-1 Texas = 6-0 Mississippi State. More importantly is Texas, Stanford, and Iowa State being the only 2 loss teams in the first BCS release. At least the Cardinal lost close road games to ranked Notre Dame and conference member Washington. Iowa State and Texas lost both at home (technically the RRR is neutral) and the Sooners demolished the Longhorns. Texas is sitting in the Top 25 after 6 games (half the season) without 1 quality win!

I seem to remember K St canceling game(s) with UO, so part of their scheduling isn’t their fault. But you’re right, they seem to be benifiting from pre season assumptions as much as anyone so far. They do, however, have games remaining that may expose or confirm those assumptions.

I’ll add that FSU is the highest rated ACC team at 14 and Rutgers and is the top BEast team at 15.

Even though Boise has very little shot at top 12 they only need to be in the top 16 to be guaranteed a BCS bid if they finish ahead of (at least) one of the AQ conference champs and that looks like a distinct possibility given the weakness at the top of the ACC, Big East and (especially) Big 10.

I’m not sure Michigan (or any other Big Ten team outside of ineligible OSU) is strong enough to go undefeated the rest of the way though. BSU, on the other hand, should easily dispatch everyone but Nevada, who they will be favored against.

I realize that, but I would give Boise a better than 50% chance of winning out, and I wouldn’t give any Big 10 team anything close to that.

@Richard

I agree, but I just don’t see the Big 10 producing a 2 loss champ. Right now all eligible teams except Northwestern already have 2 losses and I don’t think any of them are strong enough to go the rest of the season undefeated. (And I’m guessing Northwestern will end up losing at least 2 more).

If you would not put La Tech in the Top 25 why would you put Boise State there? Is it possible you are viewing Boise State by their previous offensive output in seasons prior to this one? You keep saying the previous years do not matter yet you are doing just this in voting Boise State at all.

If you would not put La Tech in the Top 25 why would you put Boise State there?”

I didn’t put Boise anywhere. They are #22 in the BCS. That’s the number I used since we’re discussing BCS bowls and the rule for a non-AQ champ to get in if they’re in the top 16 and above an AQ champ.

My apologies then. I thought in the past you were a pro Boise State / Houston / TCU guy when it came to Frank’s ballot. My point being that if it was good for them is it still equal when looking at a MAC or WAC school?

I’m pro little guys in years when I think they have a good team. Boise had some legitimately good teams, but not this year and I said so back when MSU played them. TCU had some really good teams, too, but they are down this year with the QB out and the losses on D.

I don’t think you can characterize is as “weakness” at the top of the Big East when it comes to the rankings. many years they don’t have a team ranked in the top 20 at this point. Now they have three, who have yet to play each other, meaning the SOS of the RU, Cinn, LVille survivor will only improve while Boise has nothing to get them close.

When ESPN picked the #6 LSU at #18 Texas A&M game for the 11am Central kick-off, I was pissed. Now I have to begin my drive to College Station at 3am. #1 Bama at Tennessee got the prime-time ESPN slot, and #7 South Carolina at #2 Florida got the CBS slot. I understand the USCe/UF slot, and just chalked up our 11am misfortune to Bama/Tenn tradition, even though it looks to be a blow-out on Rocky Top this Saturday.

Clay Travis now explains his conspiracy theory about how LSU and the Aggies got stuck with the typical B1G slot. As usual, according to Clay, its the Longhorns’ fault. While I rarely wear in tin-foil hat, this sounds plausible.

Well he does have a whole 90 mile drive from Houston to College Station. And there are some stretches where the speed limit is only 55. He might have to leave as early as 8:30 to get there in plenty of time.

The more logical conclusion is the same one the A&M president gave as his reason for moving to the SEC. Noone outside of Texas knows who A&M is or cares about them. Alabama/Tennesse is one of the big national rivalries, even if it may be a blowout this year.

How about after the game you head to Lake Charles for the night? It’ll save you a couple of hours on Saturday. You’ll still be dog tired, but you won’t have to drive the whole way like that. If you’re going with someone, they can sleep while you drive on Friday and then you can sleep while they drive on Saturday.

Alan – I fully expected the 3rd Saturday in Oct. game to be the 11:00 game, and the LSU/aTm to be the night game. The only other explanation other than Clay’s (who is a Tennessee guy for those that don’t know), is maybe ESPN wanted the current #1 team. But I don’t know why even that would justify having a potential blowout (keep in mind I said potential).

I hate 11:00 games also. Way too early in the morning for a game if you are attending it. But at least it is on tv, I guess.

Another possibility is that their contract limits how often they can put teams on certain networks or in certain time slots. Maybe ESPN was planning ahead for November games they want in certain slots.

I guess that could be the case. I think m(Ag) also made a good point. There definitely seems to be logjams of games with more national interest in the primetime slots, and a lot less in the morning/noon time slots. I have actually wondered why the networks don’t put more nationally appealing games on the early slots, even if the fans of those teams that want to attend them get ticked off. I wasn’t thinking of it that way, but it makes some sense. But I guessing that being able to separate the Texas schools probably doesn’t hurt either.

Brian – I don’t mind 2:30pm games on the road, but anything earlier than 6pm in Tiger Stadium just isn’t right. An 11am kick-off anywhere in the South is terrible. The only redeeming factor about playing at Kyle Field at 11am is that we won’t see the Aggie fans in their full glory.

I like the afternoon games. Now noon games in Austin in September are tough. But after September, its fine. Athens can get warm, but its usually manageable. The afternoon games give you a chance to tailgate before and go out to eat after. Austin’s pretty laid back, so the fans don’t get too rowdy at night games, but there are places that do. Athens isn’t too bad either, but it usually gets littered and you have to avoid stepping on the beer bottles at night.

There are always exceptions (like LSU and their night game tradition), and certainly I understand playing night games in the south in September. The weather doesn’t really require night games in October or November. But not everyone is in the south, either.

There is just something about night games, and being under the lights. The crowds seems to be more energetic at night (tailgating all day might have something to do with that). There is definitely a different feel to night games. The biggest negative about night games for me is the drive home. If a game starts at 7:00 at Bryant-Denny, I probably won’t get home until midnight.

It’s probably just growing up in the north, but for me there’s nothing like a brisk, sunny afternoon with some tailgating before the game and then leaving at a decent time of night so you can go out to dinner or drive home at a reasonable time. The concept of 50,000 drunks (the other 56,000 are sober) leaving downtown Columbus at midnight on a Saturday is scary for me and the police.

Alcohol related deaths aren’t as big of an issue as you’d think leaving Tuscaloosa after a game. 1st off, I don’t think there is actually 50,000 people that are trashed by the end of the game. First off, not every tailgater who plans on driving back home drinks all day. Secondly, since you can’t buy alcohol in the stadium nor exit the stadium once you are in, you’d have to sneak liquor into the stadium to keep your buzz going. I think a lot of people are responsible enough not to be total idiots. I can usually only spot a handful or two of people that I can tell are actually trashed during a Bama game. I quit drinking almost 10 years ago, so I’m usually pretty aware of my surroundings when I’m at games.

Of course there is always going to be some contingent of drunks leaving the game. But with that said, it’d probably still be hard for a DUI fatality to occur due to the fact that you can’t get over 20 miles per hour until you are almost to Birmingham (which is the direction I go). 100,000 people leaving Tuscaloosa all at once creates a heck of a traffic jam. As a matter of a fact, I honestly can’t recall ever seeing a major wreck (one where ambulances were involved) while leaving after a game (I’m not saying one hasn’t occurred, I just haven’t seen one).

That’s why I was particular about Columbus. It’s a real city and the traffic shuts it down both before and after the game. Since it’s not just a college town, that ticks off a lot of people already. Having unending traffic on a Saturday night when other have also been out drinking leads to more issues.

Add in the colder weather (the low has already hit freezing this month) and you ask for more potential problems. For comparison, October in Columbus is like November in Tuscaloosa. November in Columbus is like January in Tuscaloosa. Late in the season, it would be normal for it to drop below freezing during a night game. Not only is that no fun for the game, it means potentially icy roads as everyone leaves.

When I think of drinking and the B1G the first school that enters my mind is Ohio State. College road trips to Ohio always involved the most alcohol! Unless kids today no longer drink (which I tend to doubt) I am at a loss how Ohio is #40! My best road trip memories involve drinking on High Street followed by tales not to be discussed with a younger generation when trying to set a good example.

Matt Sarz wrote about this yesterday. The explanation is too long to quote, so you’ll have to read it yourself.

Anyways, Clay wrote an article and wasn’t happy that his first trip to College Station for a game will be a pre-noon local time kickoff. As I read the article, he seems to place the blame on ESPN “protecting” the Baylor-Texas game, which will be at 8pm on ABC. I don’t share his viewpoint at all, at least the opinion that Baylor-Texas is being “protected”.

ESPN had 2 games, LSU/A&M and UT/Bama, and 2 time slots, early afternoon and night.

The LSU/A&M game was listed as one of the 3 games to watch this week on SI.com, and listed as one of the best games this week on other national sites. I don’t think it’s controversial to say the LSU/A&M game is the more appealing one.

So why did they put the more appealing game in the morning slot? That’s the question Travis tried to answer; Sarz wrote a page saying he disagreed with ESPN’s decision, but didn’t offer any insight into what their reasoning might be.

The more generous answer might be that, with the new Fox/FX, and Pac 12 TV Network packages, many more of the best games are now airing at night. There’s certainly been complaints around social media about how the early games have generally been unappealing this year. This could be the start of a new ESPN strategy; move one of their stronger games early where there’s little competition and try and get strong ratings out of that timeslot, even if it means a few less viewers later in the night. The baseball playoffs may give additional incentive to try and put one of the better games early.

But Travis’ theory certainly has merit, though I wouldn’t say there’s anything sinister about it. At kickoff, nobody outside of the state of Texas will be watching the Longhorn/Baylor game. That might change as the game goes on if it’s close and other games are uncompetitive, but it’s not going to have good ratings to start. The LSU/A&M game would take many of those viewers in the state away (the fact that LSU probably has more fans in Texas than Baylor has nationwide makes it even worse for ABC than a A&M/Alabama game would be). I don’t think you have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that Disney might see this as looking out for the interest of its Texas ABC affiliates.

The best viewed game last weekend, by far, was the afternoon Big 10 game. Saturday night is prime time, but its one of the worst nights of the week as far as people watching tv. You could look at it as protecting LSU/A&M and not splitting the state of Texas.

And as mentioned below, its getting near basketball season. Basketball fans nationwide might watch Texas/Baylor. It might be another 70-63 game. You’ve got a team that periodically forgets running backs can carry the ball and a team who doesn’t really cover anybody.

-the CBS SC/Florida blowout in mid-afternoon was the highest rated game of the day at 3.1
-the combined national ratings of FSU/Miami and Texas/Baylor on ABC at night was just behind (3.1 also)
-AL/TN on ESPN at night was 2.5
-LSU/A&M on ESPN in early afternoon/late morning was 2.8 (10.3 in Austin, 6.9 in both Houston and San Antonio)

According to a source at TD Ameritrade, the idea of playing the 2014 NU-NU game at the iconic baseball park is being kicked around by Ameritrade officials and Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts, the Omaha native and son of Ameritrade founder Joe Ricketts. A source in the Nebraska athletic department said officials also are talking about Wrigley, though nothing has been discussed with Northwestern athletic officials yet.

[snip]

Will be interesting to see what UNO fans think about their arena capacity if Nebraska starts college hockey and plays in the Pinnacle Bank Arena (capacity 16,000). That was the vibe last week in Lincoln, around the introduction of new A.D. Shawn Eichorst, who once worked at Wisconsin. That’s probably several years down the road. I guarantee Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany would encourage an addition to his hockey conference

[snip]

Told that two Kansas writers recently wrote that Osborne should have coached Nebraska rather than become A.D. in 2007, Osborne chuckled.

“The first year or so I was out of coaching, I missed it a lot,” Osborne said. “I almost took the job at Michigan State but didn’t for family reasons. No, I was head coach here for 25 years, and GA and assistant for 11. I think 36 years in coaching was plenty.”

Imagine what it would be like if Osborne had taken the Michigan State job — and was still coaching today.

1) It’s pretty ridiculous to compare the Pac-12, SEC, and Big 12 and expect a fair, accurate breakdown of which us better than which. First, how can equal comparison be made where one league plays a nine-league schedule with 12 teams, many tough non-conference games but few vs. the other two leagues, and conference title game; one league plays an eight-game league schedule with 14 teams, a small handful of tough non-conference games but few vs. the other two leagues, and a conference title game; and the third plays a nine-game round-robin among 10 teams, very few tough non-conference games, and no conference title game? All three are fundamentally different in terms of league membership numbers and schedules, and there have very few interleague games to determine, beyond the tiny sample size of a Texas-Ole Miss or OK. State-Arizona game, which league is superior to which.

2) Beyond the Pac-12, Big 12, and SEC, there is a clear dropoff in performance among the other leagues. It is more striking of a performance than any I can remember in the past 10yeRs, if not more. The Big Ten is worse than I can remember it being, with apologies to Ohio State. They, however, are dealing with a league-wide loss of talent that hasn’t been replaced adequately. The ACC, though, has zero excuses for its non-performance. Losing to the Big East over and over after the league almost singlehandedly turned the BE into a mid-major is unacceptable. As for the Big East itself, it is over performing but still trails the top three leagues by substantial margin.

3) I wonder whether NBC will bid hard for Big East sports now that Notre Same is going to be disassociated with that league. Will Fox and ESPN team up again to outbid NBC, and will that drive up the price, or will NBC, having lost interest in the BE, not be much of a competitor to drive that price up?

4) I agree with Frank that BYU has little incentive, from the LDS’ viewpoint, to change its decision of independence over Big East. Further, with Louisville being a definitive #1 choice for school #11 in the event of Big 12 expansion, BYU stands to be the closest realistic choice as team #12. Cincinnati, strong as it is in hoops and respectable as it is on the gridiron, just does not move the meter. UConn and Rutgers are both too historically mediocre in football and irrelevant in TV ratings, in spite of their large markets. With that in mind, BYU will se the Big 12 worth giving up independence for, as its games are on national TV every week, whereas the Big East would offer only marginally better money than its current situation but less exposure.

I’m really curious to see what happens to the remainder of the WAC. Idaho will probably join the Big Sky after two years of independence. From an outsider’s perspective, it’s heard to see why that would be worse. New Mexico State has few options. Denver, which has a surprisingly strong overall athletic department, would be a great fit as a non-FB member of the MW, the WCC, the MVC, or the Summit League. As for the other members, Seattle, Utah Valley, and Bakersfield, they’re just stuck in a lousy, lousy conference that will have no automatic bid to the NCAA. It’ll be no different than when they were members of the Great West.

I just wonder what it will take for Denver to convince someone to take them, and where NMSU will ultimately land.

Interesting take… I agree that it’s very hard to compare conferences with very few quality inter-conference match-ups, and the simple fact that each conference has different play-styles/identities. That’s why the rankings are so bogus. Look no further than West Virginia, Texas, and FSU—-all media “darlings”—all proven to be paper tigers…

—Until proven on the field of play, Defense will continue to rule the day—Hence, I see NO WAY that anyone outside of the “hated” SEC takes over the mNC crown. Heck, if the “4 team playoff”(which should be or become 8 ASAP) were to occur this year—it pains me… but… I’d have to give a long, hard look at the top 4 SEC teams— they may very well beat each other up, but blow the doors off anyone else… Oregon is West Virginia with a slightly better D, Kansas State—questionable Big 12 D… Oregon State (???) not bad, but UCLA and WIsconsin are not powerhouse wins. Notre Dame no-way, no-how— should NOT be undefeated– left to the refs. Big East teams—ha!ha! funny…
–To be fair, it still is early—but seems like everyone outside the SEC is playing to be fodder in the mNC game. Thank God the B1G is so awful this year— to spare another big game disaster against those guys down south… (as already shown early this year)…

I don’t see the SEC head and shoulders above anyone else.
Florida has some good wins, but couldn’t even blow out Bowling Green or Vandy.
South Carolina was very spotty prior to the UGA game and has since lost.
UGA looked awful vs. S. Carolina.
LSU barely beat Auburn who is getting crushed by everyone, struggled against Towson and has had a real problem scoring with their offense.
MSU simply hasn’t lost yet, but Troy, UK and Tennessee gave them trouble.
Alabama has won every game comfortably, but haven’t beaten anyone unless Michigan turns out to be good, which is unclear. They really struggled scoring against an Ole Miss team which Texas (whose offense got shut out and got 4 1st downs vs. OU in 3.5 quarters) moved on totally at will. Alabama’s schedule is looking even weaker than last year-an overrated Big 10 team and only 2 of the good SEC teams. And they haven’t played either of them yet.

Oregon has been the most impressive to me so far, but the toughest part of their schedule is still ahead-Arizona St., USC, Stanford and Oregon St.

OSU is down, too. They could easily be 4-3 right now. I think the B10 is just facing a perfect storm of coaching turnover, NCAA penalties, honest recruiting and programs that don’t try hard enough. All 4 kings are down from their historic norms, and the 3 princes are down from their recent peaks.

Brian… You’re spot on— the Goph’s football still has a ways to go to be any kind of threat for B1G title. I do like what Kill and his staff have done to this point (more wins than all last season is a plus)–need to bring in more talent to turn the corner.

Bullet, You’re also spot on—opening weekend Gopher hockey sweep of #16 Michigan State (5 to 1, and 7 to 1)—Minn has solid #1 ranking— would love to see a second consecutive Frozen Four… and bring 6th NCAA men’s hockey championship home where it belongs…

Interesting take… I agree that it’s very hard to compare conferences with very few quality inter-conference match-ups, and the simple fact that each conference has different play-styles/identities. That’s why the rankings are so bogus. Look no further than West Virginia, Texas, and FSU—-all media “darlings”—all proven to be paper tigers…

You good sir are preaching to the choir! The more a conference limits itself to exposure to their style the more we will see SEC MNC games. Watching schools play arena football is fine if that is the way everybody plays but it is not. To go with Richard’s thought I look at it like this :

—Until proven on the field of play, Defense will continue to rule the day—Hence, I see NO WAY that anyone outside of the “hated” SEC takes over the mNC crown. Heck, if the “4 team playoff”(which should be or become 8 ASAP) were to occur this year—it pains me… but… I’d have to give a long, hard look at the top 4 SEC teams— they may very well beat each other up, but blow the doors off anyone else…

I think you have 2 issues :

#1 Playing defense well enough to challenge and topple the SEC because history shows offensive fireworks do not work on them

#2 Changing the perception of teams inside a conference :

ACC – It is the Florida State / Clemson conference with support from Virginia Tech and Miami. Until they can spread the wealth to challenge the top dogs the ACC will probably stay in a rut. They need to do away with the Atlantic and Costal in favor of a straightforward North vs South type arrangement. The top schools are never going to become elite if they play so many middling to poor teams.

Big East – Post realignment they are just another CUSA

B 12 – It is the Oklahoma and Texas conference and fast becoming another SWC. Until they schedule better as a conference and get back to 12 with say Louisville and Cincinnati they are going to keep sinking. It is like the conference is not equipped to handle promotion of the other teams. Kansas State was #2 last season and they were not in a BCS game. Here they are in first place this year and the conference spent the first month supporting a sagging Texas and a bipolar Oklahoma. Until the conference actively promotes the rise of a 3rd or 4th team to carry the conference when UT and OU are down it will not fix anything.

B1G – I think this is a perfect storm for the B1G and a year or two it will not be as dire as the national pundits keep proclaiming. Look at the 4 “brands” this season ”

Michigan is recovering from RichRod and NCAA issues
Nebraska is still making the conference transition
Penn State is in nuclear winter following the Sandusky case
Ohio State is in the doghouse and the first season with new coach

In another season or two these 4 schools should be in a different spot and at least 1 or 2 should be back in a hunt for the MNC. In the meantime the next schools down need to step up and fill the gap between good and great. Maybe I am blind but I get tired when folks roll over and accept the “woe are we” cr*p on how the B1G is so bad. Granted I think imploding Legends and Leaders would be the quickest and easiest way to start the change but it may be here to stay. North / South / East / West are the best but why settle for a B1G version of Atlantic and Costal!

PAC – I think they may have the #2 spot right now with better defenses than the B12 and better offenses than the B1G. I am still unsure if the move to 12 will pay off but the PAC = Southern Cal is losing steam. Oregon and Stanford have gotten play in the national eye and Arizona State or Washington type schools may rise were you have around 4 solid schools in their MNC rotation.

.

As for this season, Notre Dame, Kansas State, Rutgers, Cincinnati, Arizona State, and Oregon State are showing better defense than the teams around them so all may do better than others think they will. The question is will their conference leaders wait to long to push their cause over more visible teams. While no B1G school is in the Top 10 in scoring defense several are in the Top 40 :

mnfanstc, back to a Gopher discussion do you think the move to the Gopher Hole is beginning to pay some intangible benefits on the morale and recruiting? With all these schools spending big dollars on new stadiums does it really help? I still try and grasp the value return on facilities spending vs staff spending.

“B1G – I think this is a perfect storm for the B1G and a year or two it will not be as dire as the national pundits keep proclaiming. Look at the 4 “brands” this season ”

Michigan is recovering from RichRod and NCAA issues
Nebraska is still making the conference transition
Penn State is in nuclear winter following the Sandusky case
Ohio State is in the doghouse and the first season with new coach

In another season or two these 4 schools should be in a different spot and at least 1 or 2 should be back in a hunt for the MNC. In the meantime the next schools down need to step up and fill the gap between good and great. Maybe I am blind but I get tired when folks roll over and accept the “woe are we” cr*p on how the B1G is so bad.”

I’m with you on this, but you’ve got to admit the B10 has looked pretty bad this year so far. WI and PSU are improving, which helps, and OSU has at least improved on offense. MI’s defense may be better or they may not have played anyone of note since ND. I think the B10 could solidify late in the season before getting abused in the bowls due to the match-ups:

If you’re referring to the “Gopher Hole” as back on campus, with the very nice new stadium… I would say “yes” to money well-spent—with an eye on the future. The early returns are still on the “slow” side regarding overall support for Gopher football. I tend to place this problem more on the former U president, AD (Maturi), and the terrible choice he hired for head football coach (Brewster). The former powers that be seemed aloof when it came to the revenue sports.

The new president and AD have been very out front with the fact that “the Big 3” (football, men’s BB, and men’s hockey) need to be routinely successful. And… to be successful they need proper support from the University and the community/state. Proof: the new baseball facility is under construction, Tubby and Coach Kill have been promised new and/or upgraded practice facilities… the AD has already been stumping hard to make these and other future needs become reality…

I don’t expect Minn FB to become the next Alabama; but, I do see a brighter future for the Big 3 sports based on what the new powers that be are currently doing. Proper support will lead to winning, IMHO. Winning can cure the impatience that currently runs rampant among Gopher supporters…

Are things great? no, but I still think they are not as bad. I hate to say it but it feels like the big issues is the games that put the B1G in the worst light are the ones with the SEC. I think the B1G would fare better against the B12 which is why I rail on the subject so much. In straight head to head (say #1 B12 vs #1 B1G, and on down) I think the B1G splits at least 50/50 with B12 and maybe gets 60/40 or 70/30 but we never get to test the theory. If the B12 played the SEC as often as the B1G plays the SEC then I think the public perception of B12 greatness would drop quickly and the B1G would rise.

I am not saying the B1G should not play the SEC because you still have to play the top to become king of the hill. Just a little more balance so the “beat by the SEC” moniker gets spread around while the B12 gets credit for beating lower level ACC and PAC schools.

.

mnfanstc,

See I view it the other way as Alabama became the next Minnesota! I guess what I am looking at in some of the smaller football schools is putting the money into coaching and staff first and then build the buildings after you build the foundation of people over concrete. I am gald tho if the fans are coming back and putting butts in the seats.

“I hate to say it but it feels like the big issues is the games that put the B1G in the worst light are the ones with the SEC.”

It was the OOC against everyone that did it this year. The SEC/B10 thing gets blown out of proportion. The B10 does fine against the SEC in bowls except for 4 games, mostly. The UF blowout of OSU in the NCG, the MI and MSU blowouts on 1/1/10 and the OSU loss to LSU in the NCG.

Bowl stats:
Past 5 years – B10 is 5-9 against the SEC, including 3 of the 4 games I mentioned above
Past 10 years – B10 is 13-15 against the SEC in bowls

“I think the B1G would fare better against the B12 which is why I rail on the subject so much.”

Quite possible. That doesn’t change how good B12 teams are, but they might be better match-ups for the B10. Over the past 10 years, the B10 is 6-14 against the B12 in bowls. The difference is the lack of embarrassing blowouts. That’s because most games were really close, and those that weren’t were not major games and/or their was a clear mismatch (IA/OU last year).

“In straight head to head (say #1 B12 vs #1 B1G, and on down) I think the B1G splits at least 50/50 with B12 and maybe gets 60/40 or 70/30 but we never get to test the theory.”

No conference gets to test that theory against anyone. The closest is B10/SEC but the SEC diverts a team to the Cotton (on par with Outback team) and another goes to the Peach before the Gator. So it’s really been 3/3 (Cap 1 after 2 BCS teams for each), 4/4.5 (Outback) and 5/7 (Gator).

This year (listed in order of AP poll, then Sagarin for those not in poll):
OSU/KSU – KSU (OSU’s lack of D kills them)
MI/OU – OU (OU’s D is enough for the win)
WI/WV – WV (tons of points, and WV is better at that than WI)
NW/TT – TT (TT has the better D)
NE/TCU – NE (TCU is fading since the QB was lost)
PSU/TX – PSU?
MSU/OkSU – OkSU? (MSU really stinks on O, OkSU stinks on D)
IA/ISU – ISU already won it
PU/Baylor – Baylor (PU is horrible)
MN/KU – MN (KU is horrible)
IN/bye – IN
IL/bye – bye

The B10 goes 3-7 against the B12 and 1-1 against the bye. And that’s taking the top 10 B10 teams. Take out #4/5 and #8/9 makes it worse.

“If the B12 played the SEC as often as the B1G plays the SEC then I think the public perception of B12 greatness would drop quickly and the B1G would rise.”

For whatever reason, OU’s BCS failures were never held against the B12 like OSU’s were against the B10. At least the B12 has had 2 schools produce elite teams in the past 10 years, not the 1 the B10 has had.

“I am not saying the B1G should not play the SEC because you still have to play the top to become king of the hill. Just a little more balance so the “beat by the SEC” moniker gets spread around while the B12 gets credit for beating lower level ACC and PAC schools.”

I’m all for the B10 getting a balanced bowl schedule of 2 SEC, 2 B12, 2 ACC, 1 P12, 1 BE and 1 MAC assuming 9 games are available.

I think Baylor and OK State are marginal and well below where they were last season. Texas and TCU will have good records but few, if any, quality wins so they will be artificially inflated and slip into bowl games. Much will hinge on the Notre Dame vs Oklahoma game. If the Irish win I think the B12 is down to just Kansas State and Texas Tech. If Kansas State beats Texas Tech they have the inside track to 12-0 but since they are not Oklahoma or Texas if they will get a MNC shot?

mnfan—I’m surprised no one has mentioned Kill’s health issues…obviously that could set MN back in a big way. I’m hoping for the best for the U and the man……

One thing’s always bothered me about the new stadium….why make it so small?? Seems to me that it signals that the expectations aren’t very high….I know it could be expanded, but wouldn’t it have made better economic sense to make it 65000 or so to begin with….even if Minny stays bad, you will fill it up when Neb and Wisky come to town………..just seemed short-sighted and low-aiming to me………..

Regarding putting money into staff versus facilities: I think Minnesota has been between a rock and a hard place. The powers that be that originally moved football off-campus are really to blame IMO. The HHH Metrodome was built for the Vikings. The Twins and Gophers were secondary “tenants”. The dome has always lacked personality, granted it was/is loud for the Vikings and the Twins 2 World Series wins, but was a bad choice for the gopher football program. TCF Bank is a nice stadium back on-campus where football always belonged.

At the U, the facilities were/are necessary. I’d love to believe that we could draw a “big-name” football coach—but, the reality is, the U would only be a stepping stone because Gopher football will likely never be bigger than the Vikings/Twins/Wild/Wolves…and… you could make an argument for Gopher men’s hockey (which is always a draw). This in part, plays a role in the decision to put initial seating at around 52,000 capacity. The dome often had lots of empty seats—I think the current philosophy is to attempt to (re)build a winner, then consider the stadium expansion down the road.

I, like many gopher fans, would love to see a return to glory—for me, just getting back to challenge for the B1G title would be good. I have been a Kill backer; however, I really don’t like the university’s decision to dump the North Carolina series (at an $800K expense to-boot!!!). This was all on Kill’s philosophy to play a “soft” non-conf schedule ala Glen Mason… I don’t like it at all… Regarding Kill’s health—doctors say he is in good health–and, both he and the doctors say he can suffer these seizures at any time, they can only be controlled to a point… At this point I don’t know what role this will play with his future… but, he definitely doesn’t like answering the questions about it. I feel for him, or anyone who suffers from epileptic seizures—can’t be fun…

The jury is still out… probably gonna be up and down the rest of this year… who knows what’s next…

I think starting smaller and building up is the smart route. Smaller means more demand which will generate TV interest if the gophers can build up. I tend to agree that the soft schedule for easy wins route is not the ideal method if you actually want folks to buy seats. I think the biggest issue is getting fans to see you have to walk before you run.